55'03 


'il 


!^  H  -^    ^w''' 


J^v 


^%. 


-/:.  f' 


i-^' 


///    I 


■r'  ^■ 


f 


Arbitration  Proceedings 

AND  THE 

Findings  and  Award 

of  Frank  Morrison,  Arbitrator 


In  re 

Typographical  Union  No.  6 

versus 

The  Publishers'  Association 


New  York  City 

1919 


AGREED  STATEMENT  OF  FACTS 


The  following  Scale  of  Prices,  to  take  effect 
on  April  1,  1919,  and  to  expire  March  31,  1920, 
for  members  of  Typographical  Union  No.  6  em- 
ployed in  the  composing  rooms  on  newspapers, 
was  submitted  to  the  Publishers'  Association  of 
New  York  City.  The  only  changes  requested  by 
the  Union  from  the  present  newspaper  scale, 
which  expired  on  March  31,  1919,  are  printed 
in  black  faced  type;  and  the  matter  to  be  omit- 
ted  is   within   black   faced   brackets. 

SCALE   OF   PRICES 


NEWSPAPER  SCALE 


1.  Under  this  heading  is  included  all  work 
coming  under  the  jurisdiction  of  Typographical 
Union  No.  6  for  publications  of  any  description 
classified  as  dailies;  all  work  done  by  members 
of  the  union  in  a  composing  room  that  is  oper- 
ated and  maintained  by  an  individual,  firm  or 
corporation  for  the  production  of  its  own  daily 
publication  or  publications:  Provided,  All  work 
of  this  description  must  be  classed  the  same  in 
all  composing  rooms,  and  must  be  germane  to 
the  daily  publication  or  publications,  and  be 
owned  and  controlled  by  the  same  individual, 
firm  or  corporation  that  owns  and  controls  the 
composing   room. 

Members  of  the  Union  employed  on  daily 
publications  transferred  on  week-days  to  work 
coming  under  the  "Scale  of  Prices  for  Book  and 
Job  Work"  shall  be  paid  the  scale  of  wages 
called  for  by  the  "Scale  of  Prices  for  Newspa- 
pers"; members  of  the  Union  employed  on  daily 
publications  transferred  on  Sundays  or  legal  holi- 
days to  work  coming  under  the  "Scale  of  Prices 
for  Book  and  Job  Work"  shall  be  paid  the  scale 
of  wages  called  for  by  the  "Scale  of  Prices  for 
Book  and  Job  Work";  in  no  case  shall  a  member 
of  the  Union  employed  on  daily  publications, 
transferred  to  book  and  job  work,  be  required  to 
work  different  hours  than  are  called  for  by  the 
"Scale  of  Prices  for  Newspapers,"  unless  he  be 
paid  scale  on  overtime  for  the  highest  price 
work  performed. 

2.  Offices  where  all  body  type  is  set  on  ma- 
chine  shall   be   known   as   machine   offices. 

3.  In  machine  composition  all  work  must  be 
time  work.  Piece  work  cannot  be  allowed  in 
any    case. 

4.  All  members  of  the  Union  employed  on 
morning  newspapers,  except  as  hereinafter  pro- 
vided for,  shall  receive  not  less  than  £$37. SO] 
$46.50  per  week.  Eight  continuous  hours  (in- 
cluding thirty  minutes  for  lunch)  shall  consti- 
tute a  night's  work,  the  hours  to  be  between 
6   P.    M.   and   3   A.    M. 

5.  Men  employed  at  day  work  for  morning 
newspapers  shall  receive  day  rates  (subject  to 
third  shift  provisions).  Men  employed  at  night 
work  for  evening  newspapers  shall  receive  night 
rates    (subject   to    third    shift   provisions). 

6.  All  members  of  the  Union  employed  on 
evening  newspapers,  except  as  hereinafter  pro- 
vided for,  shall  receive  not  less  than  [$34. SOI 
$43.50  per  week.  Eight  continuous  hours  (in- 
cluding thirty  minutes  for  lunch)  shall  constitute 
a  day's  work,  the  hours  to  be  between  8  A.  M. 
and    6    P.    M. 

When  called  to  work  at  or  before  S  A.  M., 
$2  extra  shall  be  charged  in  addition  to  the 
overtime;  and  when  called  to  work  at  or  before 
7:30  A.  M.,  $1  extra  shall  be  charged  in  addition 
to  the  overtime.  On  evening  newspapers  pub- 
lishing six  days  Sunday  work  shall  be  double 
price. 


/The  following  paragraphs  represent  the  coi*- 
ditions  as  to  hours,  wages  and  working  condi- 
tions desired  by  the  Publishers'  Association  of 
New  York  City,  to  take  effect  April  1,  1919,  and 
continue  to  March  31,   1920. 


SCALE   OF   PRICES 


NEWSPAPER  SCALE 


1.     Agreed. 


2.  Agreed. 

3.  Agreed. 


4.  All  members  of  the  Union  employed  on 
morning  newspapers,  except  as  hereinafter  pro- 
vided for,  shall  receive  not  less  than  $37.50  per 
week.  Eight  continuous  hours  shall  constitute 
a  night's  work,  the  hours  to  be  between  6  P.  M. 
and  6  A.  M. 


S.     Agreed, 


6.  All  members  of  the  Union  employed  on 
evening  newspapers,  except  as  hereinafter  pro- 
vided for,  shall  receive  not  less  than  $34.50  per 
week.  Eight  continuous  hours  shall  constitute 
a  day's  work,  the  hours  to  be  between  6  A.  M. 
and  6  P.   M. 


PROrOSITION    OF   TVrO.    UNION    NO.    6 

7.  Members  of  the  Union  employed  on  even- 
ing newspapers  publishing  Sunday  editions,  ex- 
cept as  hereinafter  provided  for,  shall  receive 
not  less  than  ($5,751  $7.24  per  day.  Eight  con- 
tinuous hours  uncluding  thirty  minutes  for 
lunch)  shall  constitute  a  d.iy's  work,  the  hours 
to  be  between  8  A.  M.  and  6  P.  M.  The  rate 
for  Saturday  night  shall  not  be  less  than  [$6.25] 
$7.73  per  night  of  seven  continuous  hours  (in- 
cluding thirty  minutes  for  lunch),  the  hours  to 
be  between  6  P.  M.  and  3.  A.  M.  All  members 
tvarking  SaturJav  and  Saturday  nioht  shall  re- 
ceive [$1.25]  $1.81  extra.  Overtime  Saturday 
night  shall  be  not  less  than  [$1.39]  $1.81  per 
hour.  Extras  to  receive  50  cents  per  day  or 
night  in  addition  to  the  abo-'e  scale.  (This  docs 
not  apply  to  extras  ivorking  a  double  header.) 
M'hen  holidays  occur  on  Saturdays  and  the  paper 
is  not  published,  the  rate  for  Saturday  night 
shall  be  [$7.50]  $9.00.  When  called  to  work  on 
Sundays  between  8  A.  M.  and  6  P.  M.,  shall  be 
paid  double  price;  but  in  no  case  shall  a  mem- 
ber receive  less  than  a  day's  pay.  When  called 
at  or  before  5  A.  M.  $2  extra  shall  be  charged 
in  addition  to  the  overtime,  and  when  called  at 
or  before  7:  30  A.  M.,  $1  extra  shall  be  charged 
in  addition  to  the  overtime. 

8.  Members  of  the  Union  employed  on  even- 
ing newspapers  publishing  Sunday  evening  edi- 
tions shall  receive  not  less  than  [$5,751  $7.25 
per  day.  Eight  continuous  hours  (including 
thirty  minutes  for  lunch)  shall  constitute  a  day's 
work,  the  hours  to  be  between  8  A.  M.  and 
6  P.  M.  The  rate  for  Sunday  shall  not  be  less 
than  [$7.50]  $9.00  per  day  of  seven  continuous 
hours  (including  thirty  minutes  for  lunch),  the 
hours  to  be  between  8  A.  M.  and  6  P.  M.  Extras 
to  receive  50  cents  per  day  in  addition  to  the 
above  scale.  When  called  at  or  before  5  A.  M. 
$2  extra  shall  be  charged  in  addition  to  the 
overtime,  and  when  called  at  or  before  7:  30 
A.  M.,  $1  extra  shall  be  charged  in  addition  to 
the  overtime.  Overtime  on  Sunday  shall  be  paid 
for  at  the  rate  of   [$1.39]   $1.81  per  hour. 

9.  The  scale  for  a  "third  shift"  shall  be 
[$40.50]  $49.50  per  week.  Seven  and  a  half 
continuous  hours  (including  thirty  minutes  for 
lunch)  shall  constitute  a  day's  work,  the  hours  to 
be  between  2  A.    M.   and   10   A.    M. 

10.  Newspaper  offices  using  a  third  force  are 
privileged  to  put  on  one  make-up  between  the 
hours  of  6  A.  M.  and  2  P.  M.  for  the  same  hours 
and  wages  as  other  members  of  the  third  shift. 

11.  Overtime,  which  shall  apply  to  work  done 
before  as  well  as  after  the  hours  specified,  shall 
be  charged  at  the  rate  of  [price  and  one-half] 
double  price  based  on  the  regular  scale  for  the 
specified  hours  for  time  worked,  unless  other- 
wise provided  for.  Overtime  shall  be  computed 
in  five-minute  periods,  unless  otherwise  arranged 
between  the  office  and  the  chapel.  Rotation  in 
overtime  to  be  at  the  discretion  of  the  office. 

12.  No  member  working  in  a  chapel  is  exempt 
from  taking  his  overtime  off,  except  the  foreman 
of   each    shift. 

13.  Six  days  at  day  work  or  six  days  at 
night  work  shall  constitute  a  situation,  and  no 
situation  of  a  less  number  of  days  shall  be  al- 
lowed. 

14.  Extras  may  be  put  on  in  machine  offices 
either  day  or  night  and  may  be  put  on  at  oiie 
hiiing  for  not  to  exceed  three  days  or  .nights  in 
any  one  week,  but  the  same  extra  may  not  be 
so  employed  in  two  coiisecutive  weeks  if  others 
are  available.  When  in  accordance  with  the 
above  an  extra  is  hired  for  more  than  one  day 
or  night  he  must,  if  he  fails  to  work  for  the 
period  for  which  he  is  engaged,  supply  a  sub- 
stitute. In  hiring  extras  the  publishers  shall 
select  such  extras  from  the  priority  list  (not 
necessarily  in  order  of  priority),  if  extras  from 
such  list  are  available.  Extras  shall  receive  for 
each  day  or  night  50  cents  in  addition  to  the 
regular   scale. 

15.  In  no  case  shall  less  than  a  day's  pay  be 
accepted  by  any  member  of  the  Union. 

16.  In  machine  offices  no  stints  or  slides 
shall  be   allowed. 


PROPOSITION    OF    THE    PUBLISHERS 

7.  Members  of  the  Union  employed  on  eve- 
ning newspapers  publishing  Sunday  editions,  ex- 
cept as  hereinafter  provided  for  shall  receive  not 
less  than  $5.75  per  day.  Eight  continuous  hours 
shall  constitute  a  day's  work,  the  hours  to  be 
between  6  A.  M.  and  6  P.  M.  The  rate  for 
Saturday  night  shall  not  be  less  than  $6.25  per 
night  of  seven  continuous  hours,  the  hours  to 
be  between  6  P.  M.  and  3  A.  M.  All  members 
working  Saturday  and  Saturday  night  shall  re- 
ceive $1.25  extra.  Overtime  Saturday  night  shall 
be  not  less  than  $1.39  per  hour.  Extras  to  re- 
ceive SO  cents  per  day  or  night  in  addition  to 
the  above  scale.  (This  does  not  apply  to  extras 
working  a  double  header.)  When  holidays  occur 
on  Saturdays  and  the  paper  is  not  published,  the 
rate  for  Saturday  night  shall  be  $7.50.  When 
called  to  work  on  Sundays  between  6  A.  M.  and 
6  P.  M.  shall  be  paid  double  price;  but  in  no 
case  shall  a  member  receive  less  than  a  day's 
pay. 


8.  Members  of  the  Union  employed  on  eve- 
ning newspapers  publishing  Sunday  evening  edi- 
tions shall  receive  not  less  than  $5.75  per  day. 
Eight  continuous  hours  shall  constitute  a  day's 
work,  the  hours  to  be  between  6  A.  M.  and  6 
P.  M.  The  rate  for  Sunday  shall  not  be  less 
than  $7.50  per  day  of  seven  continuous  hours, 
the  hours  to  be  between  6  A.  M.  and  6  P.  M. 
Extras  to  receive  50  cents  per  day  in  addition 
to  the  above  scale. 


9.     Deleted. 


10.     Deleted. 


11.  Overtime,  which  shall  apply  to  work  done 
before  as  well  as  after  the  hours  specified,  shall 
be  charged  at  the  rate  of  price  and  one-half, 
based  on  the  regular  scale  for  the  specified 
hours  for  the  time  worked,  unless  otherwise  pro- 
vided for.  Overtime  shall  be  computed  in  five- 
minute  periods,  unless  otherwise  arranged 
between  the  office  and  the  chapel.  Rotation  in 
overtime   to   be   at  the   discretion   of  the   office. 

12.  Agreed. 


13.     Agreed. 


14.  Extras  may  be  put  on  in  machine  offices 
either  day  or  night,  and  may  be  put  on  at  one 
hiring  for  not  to  exceed  three  days  or  nights 
in  any  one  week.  When  in  accordance  with 
the  above  an  extra  is  hired  for  more  than  one 
day  or  night,  he  must,  if  he  fails  to  work  for 
the  period  for  which  he  is  engaged,  supply  a 
substitute.  In  hiring  extras  the  Publishers  shall 
select  such  extras  from  the  priority  list  (not 
necessarily  in  order  of  priority)  if  extras  from 
such  list  are  available.  Extras  shall  receive  for 
each  day  or  night  SO  cents  in  addition  to  the 
regular  scale. 


15.  Agreed. 

16.  Agreed. 


PROPOSITION    OF    TYPO.    UNION    NO.    6 

17.  No  "sub"  shall  be  allowed  to  fill  a 
situation  and  work  as  extra  on  morning  or 
evening  newspapers   on  the   same   day. 

18.  On  all  matter  set  for  daily  newspapers 
proofs  shall  be  read  and  copy  held  by  a  mem- 
ber of  the   Union. 

19.  No  member  of  the  Union  shall  be  held 
financially  responsible  for  errors  occurring  in  an 
advertisement,  nor  shall  any  member  of  the 
Union  be  held  responsible  for  errors  appearing 
in   railroaded   matter. 

20.  In  reducing  force  foreman  cannot  lay  off 
regular  employees  until  the  end  of  the  fiscal 
week. 

21.  All  compositors  employed  in  offices  where 
machines  are  introduced  must  have  the  exclusive 
privilege  of  learning  and  becoming  familiar^  with 
their  operation.  No  obstruction  or  restriction 
whatever  by  members  shall  be  placed  upon  or 
stand  in  the  way  of  learners  other  than  that 
they   are   not   practical   printers. 

22.  When  an  office  introduces  machines  it 
shall  take  compositors  from  those  already  mem- 
bers  of   the   chapel   and    instruct   them. 

23.  The  officers  of  the  Union  are  empowered 
to  enter  into  a  contract  for  at  least  one  year 
with  offices  adopting  the  all-time  scale. 

24.  All  Union  machine  offices  are  prohibited 
from  supplying  machine  composition  to  non- 
union  offices. 

25.  The  practice  of  a  foreman  selecting  or 
designating  a  substitute  is  in  direct  contradic- 
tion to  the  regulations  of  Typographical  Union 
No.  6  and  I.  T.  U.  law.  The  regular  shall  be 
the  person  to  select  his  own  substitute,  and  shall 
in  no  way  be  responsible  for  the  work  per- 
formed by  the  same,  but  no  foreman  shall  be 
compelled  to  accept  a  substitute  who  is  incompe- 
tent or  otherwise  incapacitated,  and  if  the  regu- 
lar's selection  should  fail  to  appear  on  time  or 
should  be  incapacitated,  the  foreman  shall  direct 
the  chairman  to  select  or  designate  another  sub- 
stitute. A  substitute  selected  according  to  the 
foregoing  provisions  shall  receive  a  regular  day's 
pay,  otherwise  50  cents  additional  as  an  extra. 

26.  The  practice  of  interchanging,  exchang- 
ing,    borrowing,     lending    or    buying     of     matter 

Ereviously  used  either  in  form  of  type  or  matrices 
etween  newspapers  or  job  offices  not  owned 
by  the  same  individual,  firm  or  corporation,  and 
publishL'd  in  the  same  establishment,  is  unlawful 
and  shall  not  be  allowed.  Provided,  that  the 
reproduction  of  the  original  of  such  type, 
matrices  or  plates  in  type  within  four  days  of 
publication  shall  be  deemed  a  compliance  with 
this  law. 

27.  All  type  matter  in  local  advertising,  when 
matrices  or  plates  are  furnished  the  office  in- 
stead of  copy,  shall  be  reproduced  within  four 
working  days  of  publication.  It  shall  not  be 
necessary  to  reproduce  type  matter  in  out-of- 
town  advertisements  whether  transient  or  con- 
tract or  in  the  advertising  of  out-of-town  ad- 
vertisers who  sell  their  product  through  their 
own  branch  stores  or  agencies  in  this  or  other 
cities. 

28.  On  advertisements  or  other  matter  set 
for  daily  newspapers  in  job  offices  the  difference 
between  the  job  and.  newspaper  scale  must  be 
paid. 

29.  Advertisements  reproduced  in  photo-en- 
graving room  must  be  reset  by  compositors,  ex- 
cept in  instances  where  it  is  impossible  to  set 
said  advertisements  completely  in  the  composing 
room. 

30.  No  departments  shall  be  recognized,  ex- 
cept by  agreement  between  the  office  and  the 
chapel. 

31.  The  office  is  entitled  to  all  "pick-ups"  of 
any  character  whatsoever.  Matter  once  paid  for 
shall  always  remain  the  property  of  the  office. 
"Kill"  marks  shall  not  deprive  the  office  of 
"pick-ups." 


PROPOSITION    OF    THE    PUBLISHERS 

17.  Agreed. 

18.  Agreed. 

19.  Agreed. 

20.  Agreed. 

21.  Agreed. 

22.  Agreed. 

23.  Agreed. 

24.  Agreed. 

25.  Agreed. 


26.     Agreed. 


27.     Agreed. 


28.  Agreed. 

29.  Agreed. 

30.  Agreed. 

31.  Agreed. 


480510 


PROPOSITION   OF   TYPO.   UNION   No.    6 

32.  On  morning  and  evening  newspapers 
twelve  hours  must  intervene  between  the  time 
of  quitting  and  starting  work,  but  no  member 
of  the  Union  shall  be  allowed  to  work  more  than 
twelve  hours  in  any  twenty-four.  This  shall  not 
ipply  on  Saturdays  or  election  day  to  evening 
newspapers  publishing  Sunday  editions  or  to  un- 
usual emergencies.  Substitutes  accepting  work 
on  the  third  shift  shall  not  be  subject  to  the 
twelve-hour  limit,  providing  they  do  not  work 
two  consecutive  shifts. 

33.  Offices  publishing  morning  and  evening 
papers  have  the  right  to  use  advertisements  and 
reading  matter  set  up  for  the  morning  paper  in 
the  evening  paper,  and  \-ice  versa,  or  in  both. 

34.  Chapels  may  provide  for  the  time  to  go 
to  lunch,  but  the  foreman  cannot  keep  an 
employee  more  than  four  hours  before  allowing 
lunch,  except  in  cases  of  emergency.  A  second 
lunch  time  shall  be  allowed  when  more  than 
one   hour  overtime   is   required. 

35.  Foremen  of  printing  offices  have  the  right 
to  employ  help,  and  may  discharge  (1)  for  in- 
competency, (2)  for  neglect  of  duty,  (3)  for 
violation  of  office  rules  (which  shall  be  con- 
spicuously posted),  or  of  laws  of  the  chapel  or 
Union,  and  (4)  to  decrease  the  force,  such  de- 
crease to  be  accomplished  by  discharging  first 
the  person  or  persons  last  employed,  either  as 
regular  employees  or  as  extra  emploj-ees,  as  the 
exigencies  of  the  matter  may  require.  Should 
there  be  an  increase  in  the  force  the  persons 
displaced  through  such  cause  shall  be  reinstated 
in  reverse  order  in  which  they  were  discharged 
before  other  help  may  be  employed.  Upon  de- 
rnand,  the  foreman  shall  give  the  reason  for 
discharge  in  writing.  Persons  considered  capable 
as  substitutes  by  foremen  shall  be  deemed  com- 
petent to  fill  regular  situations,  and  the  substi- 
tute oldest  in  continuous  service  shall  have  prior 
right  in  the  filling  of  the  first  vacancy.  This 
section  shall  apply  to  incoming  as  well  as  out- 
going foremen. 

36.  When  a  member  is  discharged  for  any  of 
the  foregoing  reasons,  and  such  action  of  the 
foreman  is  contested  by  the  Union  on  behalf 
of  the  member  affected,  the  contention  shall  be 
referred  to  a  conference  committee  of  three 
representatives  of  the  employers  and  three  repre- 
sentatives of  the  Union.  After  considering  all 
of  the  evidence  in  connection  with  the  reason 
assigned  for  discharge,  effort  at  agreement  shall 
be  made,  and  if  a  decision  is  reached  it  shall  be 
final,  and  shall  be  so  accepted  by  both  parties 
to  the  controversy.  If  agreement  cannot  be 
reached  the  conference  committee  shall  select  a 
seventh  member,  and  the  decision  of  the  com- 
mittee as  thus  made  up  shall  be  final.  Should 
the  conferees  fail  to  agree  on  an  odd  man  he 
shall  be  selected  by  the  presiding  Judge  of  the 
Appellate  Division  of  the  Supreme  Court  for 
the  First  or  Second  District.  Where  discharges 
are  made  for  reasons  other  than  stated  in  this 
section,  and  the  aggrieved  member  appeals,  the 
procedure  shall  be  in  accordance  with  the  I.  T.  U. 
law  in  force  at  date  of  signing  of  agreement. 

37.  Regulars  may  be  transferred  by  mutual 
consent  from  shift  to  shift  whenever  the  exi- 
gencies may  require  it.  If  such  transfers  cannot 
be  arranged  by  mutual  consent  then  the  men 
must  be  transferred  according  to  their  priority 
standing  in  the  office. 

38.  In  cases  where  menabers  are  admitted  as 
residents  of  the  Union  Printers  Home,  or  who 
enlist  for  active  service  in  the  regular  army  or 
navy  in  time  of  war,  or  enlist  for  active  service 
in  the  army  or  navy  of  any  country  that  may 
be  allied  with  the  United  States  in  a  war  for  a 
common  cause,  or  members  of  the  National 
Guard  or  Canadian  Militia  who  may  be  ordered 
to  war,  or  those  who  may  actively  engage  in 
war  work_  for  the  American  Red  Cross,  Red 
Cross  societies  of  the  Allies,  Knights  of  Co- 
lumbus, the  Salvation  Army,  the  Young  Men's 
Christian  Association  or  any  recognized  organiza- 
tion of  a  similar  character,  their  situations  may 
be  filled  by  the  foreman:  Provided,  That  upon 
again  reporting  for  duty  the  situations  formerly 
held  by  these  members  shall  be  restored  to  them. 


PROPOSITION    OF    THE    PUBLISHERS 
22.     Agreed. 


33.     Agreed. 


34.     Agreed. 


35.     Agreed. 


36.     Agreed. 


37.     Agreed. 


38.     Agreed. 


PROPOSITION    OF    TYPO.    UNION    No.     6 

39.  Any  member  of  the  International  Typo- 
graphical Union  employed  in  an  official  capacity 
by  his  local  union  or  by  the  International  Typo- 
graphical Union,  or  any  member  incapacitated  by 
illness,  shall  not  lose  his  priority  in  the  office 
in  which  he  is  employed:  Provided,  That  at 
the  end  of  three  months  the  situation  may  be 
filled  by  the  foreman,  but  upon  again  reporting 
for  duty  the  situations  formerly  held  by  these 
members    shall   be    restored    to    them. 


SCALE,  RULES,  ETC. 

Governing  Machine-Tenders  in 
Newspaper  Offices 

40.  The    scale    for    machine-tenders    shall    be: 

From   1   to  4  machines [$29.50]  $38.50 

From   5   to   8   machines [$30.50]  $39.50 

From   9   to   12   machines [$33.50]  $43.50 

For    13   or   more   machines [$35.50]  $44.50 

Machine-tenders  working  at_  night  shall  re- 
ceive $5.00  per  week  in  addition  to  the  above 
day  scale. 

41.  A  machine-tender  shall  have  charge  of 
all  repairs  on  type-setting  machines  in  plants 
of  four  machines  or  more.  No  printer  member 
shall  be  allowed  to  act  as  machinist  on  any  plant 
of   more   than   three   machines. 

42.  The  regular  working  time  of  a  machine- 
tender  shall  be  six  days  or  nights  per  week  of 
as  many  hours  each  as  are  the  regular  hours 
of  the  operators  in  the  office  employed  in  operat- 
ing  the   machines. 

43.  All  time  worked  over  and  above  these 
hours  shall  be  considered  as  overtime,  and  shall 
be  charged  at  the  rate  of  [price  and  one-half] 
double  price  every  hour  so  employed,  based  on 
the  regular  machine-tenders'  scale  for  the  speci- 
fied hours,  computed  in  five-minute  periods, 
unless  otherwise  arranged  between  the  office  and 
the  chapel. 

44.  No  machine-tender  holding  a  regular  sit- 
uation in  an  office  will  be  permitted  to  attend 
to  the  repairs  on  machines  in  any  office  other 
than  the  situation  in  which  he  is  employed,  ex- 
cept in  case  of  emergency,  all  such  cases  to  be 
reported  to  the  president  of  the  branch  as  soon 
as  possible. 

45.  Assistants  to  machine-tenders  shall  be 
classed   as   helpers. 

46.  All  offices  of  four  machines  or  more  shall 
be  entitled  to  employ  one  helper  to  each  ma- 
chine-tender employed;  who  shall  not  handle 
tools,   make   repairs   or    adjustments. 

47.  All  registered  apprentices  at  the  time  of 
signing  scale,  in  the  last  year  of  their  apprentice- 
ship shall  receive  two-thirds  of  the  journey- 
men's scale.  No  further  machine  apprentices 
shall  be   allowed. 

48.  Machine^tenders,  machine-tenders'  help- 
ers or  apprentices  shall  not  be  allowed  to  be  in 
charge  of  the  operation  of  machines  casting 
slugs   or  type  that  take  ink  in  printing. 


PROPOSITION    OF    THE    PUBLISHERS 
39.     Agreed. 


40.  The    scale    for    machine-tenders    shall   be; 

From;    1    to   4    machines $29.50 

From    5    to    8    machines 30.50 

From    9    to    12    machines 33.50 

For    13   or  more   machines 35.50 

Machine-tenders  working  at  night  shall  receive 
$5  per  week  in  addition  to  the  above  day  scale. 

41.  Agreed.' 


42.     Agreed. 


43.  All  time  worked  over  and  above  these 
hours  shall  be  considered  as  overtime  and  shall 
be  charged  at  the  rate  of  price  and  one-half 
every  hour  so  employed,  based  on  the  regular 
machine-tenders'  scale  for  the  specified  hours, 
computed  in  five-minute  periods,  unless  other- 
wise arranged  between  the  office  and  the  chapel. 


44.  Agreed. 

45.  Agreed. 

46.  Agreed. 

47.  Agreed. 

48.  Agreed  . 


PROPOSITION     TO    TYPO.     UNION     No.     6 

APPRENTICES 

In  newspaper  offices,  declared  as  .such  by  the 
Union,  apprentices  may  be  employed  in  the  ratio 
of  one  to  everv  fifteen  men  or  a  majority  frac- 
tion thereof,  but  not  more  than  six  shall  be  per- 
mitted  in   any   office. 

In  the  first  year  an  apprentice  may  be  re- 
quired to  perform  general  work  in  the  compos- 
ing room  at  the  discretion  of  the  foreman. 

In  the  second  year  an  apprentice  shall  be  em- 
ployed at  least  fifty  per  cent,  of  his  time  at  hand 
composition    and    distribution. 

In  the  third  year  an  apprentice  shall  be  em- 
ployed at  least  seventy-five  per  cent,  of  his  time 
at  hand  composition  and  distribution,  and  shall 
receive   one-half   of   the   regular   scale. 

In  the  fourth  year  an  apprentice  shall  be  em- 
ployed at  least  seven  hours  each  day  at  hand 
composition  and  distribution,  and  shall  receive 
one-half   of   the   regular   scale. 

In  the  fifth  year  an  apprentice  shall  be  em- 
ployed at  least  seven  hours  each  day  at  hand 
composition  and  distribution,  and  in  machine 
offices  may  practice  on  the  machine,  and  shall 
receive   two-thirds   of   the    regular   scale. 

Apprentices  shall  be  registered  on  the  books 
of  the  Union  and  shall  at  all  times  be  under  the 
supervision   of   the   chairman. 

All  registered  apprentices  shall  be  between 
the   ages   of   sixteen    and   twenty-one. 

Apprentices  shall  be  prohibited  from  working 
overtime  or  more  than  six  days  in  any  one  week. 

On  the  completion  of  the  term  of  service  of 
an  apprentice  and  his  admission  into  the  Union 
he  shall  be  placed  at  the  bottom  of  the  priority 
list  in  the  office  in  which  he  is  working. 

Office  boys  (not  apprentices)  will  be  allowed 
to  work  proof  presses,  carry  proofs  and  copy, 
and  type  on  galleys,  but  shall  not  be  allowed  to 
handle  type,  proofs,  copy  or  any  printing  ma- 
terial in  any  other  manner  whatever. 


PROPOSITION    OF    THE    PUBLISHERS 

APPRENTICES 

Agreed  to   in   all   its   provisions. 


ARGUMENT 


Before  Mr.  FRANK  MORRISON,  Arbitrator 


Met  pursuant  to  agreement  at  the  office  of 
the  Boston  Globe,  World  Building,  at  10  A.  M. 
Appearances — 

For  the  Publishers'  Association  of  the  City  of 
New  York: 

Mr.    Victor    H.     Polachek;     Mr.    Don    C. 
Seitz;    Mr.    Hugh   A.    O'Donnell;    Mr.    Ervin 
Wardman;    Mr.    Louis    Wiley;    Mr.    Herbert 
Gunnison;    Mr.   Edward   P.   Call. 
For   New   York  Typographical   Union   No.   6: 
Mr.  Leon  H.  Rouse;  Mr.   S.  Oppenheimer; 
Mr.   Chas.   Marquart;   Mr.  James  W.   Keller; 
Mr.    John    S.    O'Connell;    Mr.    Theodore    F. 
Douglas;   Mr.   Louis  Fischer. 
Mr.     Morrison — Is     it     understood     that    this 
award   will   be  retroactive,   as  of  April   1st,   1919? 
(Agreed  to  by  all  parties.) 

Mr.  Warcman — You  might  as  well  add  that 
it  will  be  for  one  year. 

Mr.  Rouse — That  the  term  of  the  contract  will 
be  for  one  year  to  expire  on  the  31st  day  of 
March,  1920. 

(Agreed  to  by  all  parties.) 

Mr.  Morrison — I  would  request  the  repre- 
sentatives of  the  Tyopgraphical  Union  to  submit 
their  statements  in  regard  to  the  increase  in 
wages  and  the  double  time.  I  understand  those 
are  the  only  two  matters  you  submit. 

Mr.  Rouse — There  are  three  points  at  issue 
we  have  submitted.  We  have  three  contentions 
before  the  Arbitrator:  one  is  for  an  increase  of 
$9;  one  is  for  double  price  for  overtime,  and 
the  other  relates  to  Brooklyn,  in  regard  to  the 
bonus.  There  the  men  work  what  is  called  the 
double-header,  working  on  Saturday  and  Satur- 
day night.  It  is  on  the  question  of  increasing 
the  bonus  rate  for  putting  in  two  days  in  one. 
I  shall  ask  Mr.  Oppenheimer  to  read  our  brief. 

Mr.    Oppenheimer  then    read   the   brief   as   fol- 
lows: 
"  Mr.   Frank   Morrison,   Arbiter. 

"  Dear  Sir — On  July  2,  1918,  in  a  scale  contro- 
versy between  the  Publishers'  Association  and 
Typographical  Union  No.  6,  which  was  sub- 
mitted to  arbitration  before  the  Hon.  John 
Mitchell  as  arbitrator,  the  Union  opened  its  case 
with  the   following  paragraph: 

"  In   presenting   the   case   of  Typographical 
Union   No.   6  vs.   The   New   York   Newspaper 
Publishers'    Association,    we    wish    to    empha- 
size the  fact  that  our  demand  is  solely  for  a 
financial   readjustment  in   the  scale  of  prices, 
made   imperative   by   the  fact  that  because  of 
the    higher    and    still    soaring    cost    of    abso- 
lutely   everything    that    enters    into    the    life 
of    an    individual    it    is    impossible    for    us    to 
retain    any    semblance    of    that    standard    of 
living    to    which    we    have    been    accustomed 
for  many  years  as  working  men." 
While  the  paragraph   was  apropos  at  that  time, 
it    is   many    times    more    so    now.     With    the    cost 
of  food,  wearing  apparel  of  all   kinds,  light,  coal, 
ice,   and   all   those    items   that   enter   into   the   life 
of  a  wage   earner,   as   we   shall   prove  by  authori- 
tative  testimony,   still    on    the    increase,   the    raise 
in    rentals    demanded    by    the    landlords    to    take 
effect    in    October    are   of   such    proportions   as   to 
drive    the   average    wage    earner   to    despair. 

At  the  time  of  the  presentation  of  the  case 
above  referred  to,  July  2,  1918,  printers  working 
on  morning  newspapers  were  receiving  $33  per 
week.  There  is,  and  always  has  been  a  differ- 
ence of  $3  per  week  between  day  and  night  men 
and  the  same  difference  between  night  and 
"  lobster  "  shifts. 


New  York,  April  17th,  1919 

That  is  to  say,  day  men  receive  $3  per  week 
less  than  night  men  and  "lobster"  shift  men 
receive  $3  per  week  more  than  night  men.  The 
greater  number  of  men  working  on  the  news- 
papers work  at  night;  a  small  proportion  work 
on  the  "  lobster  "  shift.  For  that  reason,  for 
the  sake  of  brevity,  we  quote  the  night  scale. 

On  January  1,  1918,  the  Union  asked  for  a 
scale  increase  of  $6  per  week.  Previous  to  that 
time,  AS  FAR  BACK  AS  1912,  NEWSPAPER 
PRINTERS  HAD  RECEIVED  ABSOLUTELY 
NO  INCREASE  IN   SCALE. 

After  some  nego'tiation  newspaper  printers 
were  granted  an  increase  of  $2  from  January  1, 
1918,  the  contract  being  signed  up  for  six 
months.  At  that  time  morning  newspaper  men 
were  receiving  ^33  per  week,  the  raise  of  $2 
placing   their   salaries   at  $35. 

At  the  expiration  of  this  contract,  July,  1918, 
the  Union  asked  for  an  increase  of  $4  per  week 
and  was  finally  awarded  $2.50  by  Arbitrator 
Mitchell. 

YOU  WILL  THUS  PERCEIVE,  MR. 
ARBITRATOR,  THAT  THE  SUM  TOTAL  OF 
A  RAISE  IN  SCALE  AWARDED  TO  NEWS- 
PAPER PRINTERS  SINCE  1912  WAS  $4.50. 
From  1912  to  1918  morning  newspaper  print- 
ers were  receiving  (the  scale)  $33  per  week 
and  evening  newspaper  printers  were  receiving 
$30. 

The  awards  of  $2  in  January,  1918,  and  $2.50 
in  July,  1918,  brought  up  the  respective  scales 
to  $37.50  and  $34.50. 

We  call  particular  attention  at  this  time,  as 
proved  by  the  foregoing  figures,  which  cannot 
be  successfully  denied,  that  since  1912  up  to 
the  present  moment,  morning  newspaper  printers 
have  received  an  increase  of  less  than  15  per 
cent.,  while  the  increase  for  evening  newspaper 
men  was  15  per  cent.,  APPROXIMATELY  9 
CENTS  PER  HOUR  IN  A  PERIOD  OF 
SEVEN   YEARS. 

We  shall  prove  by  documentary  evidence  that 
during  this  period  of  1912-1918  the  cost  of 
living  has  gone  up  79   per  cent. 

Indeed,  members  of  the  Union  at  the  present 
time  are  in  receipt  of  notices  that  after  October 
1,  1919,  their  rents  are  to  be  again  raised,  in 
some  instances  to  an  extent  exceeding  25  per 
cent. 

We  shall  produce  evidence  to  prove  that  the 
raise  in  scale  granted  to  newspaper  men  since 
1912  to  the  present  time  was  ridiculously  in- 
adequate, first  because  of  the  fact  that  the  scale 
increase  during  that  period  was  less  than  14  and 
15  per  cent,  respectively,  as  compared  to  an  in- 
creased cost  of  living  amounting  to  79  i)cr  cent.; 
and  secondly,  BECAUSE  OF  THE  FACT 
THAT  OTHER  BRANCHES  OF  THE  NEWS- 
TAPER  TRADE  IN  THIS  CITY  HAVING 
CONTRACTURAL  RELATIONS  WITH  THE 
PUBLISHERS'  ASSOCIATION  REQUIRING 
LESS  SKILL  THAN  THAT  OF  THE 
PRINTER,  HAVE  RECEIVED  FAR  GREATER 
ADVANCES  THROUGH  ARBITRATION 
AND    WAR    LABOR    BOARD    DECISIONS. 

In  making  his  award  in  July,  1918,  Mr. 
Mitchell  said:  (see  copy  of  proceedings,  page  97, 
second  column.) 

"  If  the  arbitrator  were  permitted  to  de- 
cide the  question  of  the  wage  scale  solely 
upon  the  evidence  as  to  the  increase  in  the 
cost  of  living  or  upon  the  evidence  showing 
increases  paid  to  other  classes  of  skilled 
workmen  he  would  be  justified  in  awarding — 
indeed  he  would  be  in  conscience  bound  to 
award — to  the  members  of  the  Union  the  full 
amount  of  increased  wages  proposed  by 
them.  There  is,  however,  other  evidence 
submitted    to    the    arbitrator    which    he    is    re- 


<^nire<l    to   consider    in    reaching    his    conclu- 
sions. 

"  The  arbitrator  must  take  into  account 
and  eive  due  weight  to  the  evidence  intro- 
duced hy  the  Publishers  showing  that  wage 
increases  paid  to  union  printers  employed 
in  newspaper  offices  in  other  cities  have  in 
few  instances  been  as  great  as  the  increase 
proposed  by  the  Printers." 

You  will  perceive  that  the  arbitrator  declared 
that  upon  the  evidence  presented  he  "  would  be 
in  conscience  bound  to  award  the  full  amount 
of  the   increased  wages  proposed  by  them." 

He  says  further:  "There  is,  however,  other 
evidence,  etc." 

We  propose  to  prove  by  documentary  evidence, 
that  the  objections  referred  to  by  the  arbitrator 
are  absolutely  removed  and  conditions  have  been 
so  reversed  since  that  award  as  to  leave  no  doubt 
in  the  mind  of  any  judge  of  the  justice  of  the 
claim  of  Typographical  Union  No.  6  in  these 
proceedings. 

We  shall  produce  testimony  to  prove  that  since 
July,  1918,  newspaper  printers  in  other  juris- 
dictions have  received  scale  raises  far  in  excess 
of  that  received  by  newspaper  printers  in  New 
York. 

The  newspaper  compositor  of  today  not  only 
has  {o  acquire  and  retain  the  accumulated  knowl- 
edge of  the  craft  of  the  past  four  centuries,  but 
in  addition  he  must  be  able  to  meet  the  modern 
requirements  by  mastering  the  many  additional 
implements  that  have  entered  the  composing 
room  in  the  last  twenty-five  years.  The  Mergan- 
thaler  Linotype,  the  Intertype,  the  Monotype, 
with  their  constant  changes  and  improvements, 
make  many  extra  demands  upon  the  worker,  in- 
creasing the  output  at  least  five  times,  requiring 
swift  and  accurate  reading  of  all  manner  of 
manuscript,  the  development  of  the  keenest 
sense  of  touch  and  hearing  in  order  to  detect 
any  irregularity  in  the  dropping  of  the  matrices 
when  being  assembled,  intensifying  the  strain 
upon  the  eye  to  a  great  degree,  and  demanding 
a  much  closer  application  to  and  concentration 
on  the  work  in  hand  than  was  called  for  in 
the    time    of    hand    composing    alone. 

To  operate  these  machines  successfully  prob- 
ably calls  for  the  exercise  of  mental  concentra- 
tion exceeded  in  no  other  productive  process. 
It  is  useless  for  an  individual  to  attempt  oper- 
ation without  the  fullest  possession  of  all  his 
faculties. 

To  intelligently  compose  any  matter  that  may 
be  on  hand  the  compositor  must  be  possessed 
of  a  general  knowledge  of  a  wide  range  of  sub- 
jects, must  keep  in  touch  with  all  current  events, 
must  have  a  comprehensive  grasp  of  the  Eng- 
lish language  and  the  rules  of  grammar,  must 
know  the  game  of  politics  as  well  as  the  game 
of  baseball,  must  have  an  acquaintance  with  the 
science  of  sociology,  as  well  as  with  the  frivoli- 
ties of  the  social  set;  in  fact,  he  must  keep  in 
touch  with  every  thought  and  idea  that  finds 
expression  in  the  newspaper  of  today — art,  lit- 
erature, science,  drama  and  music,  and  also  in 
the  commonplace  and  baser  happenings.  All 
this  is  essential  in  order  that  there  may  be 
correct  interpretation  between  the  one  who 
gives  the  thought,  idea,  criticism  or  description 
and    the    one    who    receives    it. 

Now  there  is  one  point  that  should  not  be 
lost  sight  of.  While  it  is  true  that  there  is  the 
same  division  of  labor  in  a  composing  room  as 
obtains  in  most  productive  enterprises,  and  a 
casual  observer  would  witness  the  individual 
worker  performing  but  one  allotted  part,  still  the 
fact  is  that  the  requirements  of  a  newspaper 
composing  room,  and  the  many  contingencies 
arising,  demand  that  compositors  be  skilled  in 
practically  every  department,  and  it  is  a  daily 
occurrence  to  shift  us  from  one  activity  to 
another    as    the    occasion    arises. 

These  points  demonstrate  the  fact  that  the 
skill  required  by  us  has  been  in  a  constantly 
increasing  ratio  with  every  new  implement  ap- 
plied, though  the  reverse  of  this  is  probably 
true  in  many  other  productive  industries  where 
machine    production    has    been    introduced. 

The  foregoing  is  an  example  of  the  skill  and 
intelligence  required  of  the  newspaper  printer. 

A   history  of   the   hygienic   conditions   the  prin- 


ter is  confronted  with,  with  their  accompanying 
effect  upon  his  physical  well-being,  is  pertinent 
at  this  time.  (Exhibit  X,  pp.  6,  7,  8,  9,  28,  29, 
•40,  65,   100.) 

AH  things  considered,  the  time  spent  in  ap- 
prenticeship— 5  years — the  skill  and  intelligence 
required,  the  constant  mental  and  physical  strain, 
the  high  tension  under  which  the  work  of  the 
■newspaper  printer  must  be  performed,  with  the 
accompanying  results  of  a  high  percentage  of 
mortality  in  the  craft,  LEAVES  NO  DOUBT 
THE  NEWSPAPER  PRINTER.  UP  TO  THE 
PRESENT  TIME,  HAS  NEVER  BEEN  ADE- 
QUATELY   REMUNERATED. 

We  shall  produce  evidence  to  prove  that  the 
printer  always  was,  until  recently,  the  highest 
paid  artisan  of  the  Allied  trades  in  a  newspaper. 
It  will  be  shown  in  evidence  that  New  York 
has  not  received  the  proportionate  scale  increase 
granted   in   other  parts   of   the   country. 

It  should  be  borne  in  mind  that  in  addition 
to  living  conditions  being  at  a  higher  cost  in 
New  York  than  most  any  other  part  of  the 
country,  a  great  many  of  our  members  live  in 
the  suburbs.  The  cost  of  transportation  for 
these  members  has  been  increased  from  10  to 
30   per  cent. 

Furthermore,  we  shall  produce  evidence  to 
show  that  while  in  most  trades  and  in  a  num- 
ber of  jurisdictions  in  the  newspaper  printing 
trade,  the  percentage  of  increased  wages  was 
to  an  extent  partly  sufficient  to  permit  the 
members  of  the  various  crafts  to  continue  that 
standard  of  living  which  years  of  toil  and  or- 
ganization have  brought  to  the  level  attained  by 
them,  the  newspaper  printers  of  New  York,  on 
the  other  hand,  by  the  fact  that  the  cost  of 
living  since  1912  has  risen  more  than  19  per 
cent,  (during  which  time  they  have  been  in  re- 
ceipt of  an  increase  of  less  than  IS  per  cent, 
in  wages,  APPROXIMATELY  9  CENTS  AN 
HOUR),  are  face  to  face  with  the  condition  that 
unless  adequate  relief  be  granted  they  must  of 
necessity  lower  to  a  great  degree  the  standard 
of  living  they  have  attained  and  sustained  for 
very   many   years. 

The  printer's  standard  of  living  is  what  his 
wages  will  get  him.  The  dollar  today  is  equiva- 
lent to  $1.68  in  1913. — Monthly  Labor  Review, 
January,  1919,  of  the  Bureau  of  Labor  Statis- 
tics. U.  S.  Department  of  Labor,  page  11.  (Ex- 
hibit  A.) 

In  making  a  comparison  of  wages  received  by 
other  crafts,  both  skilled  and  unskilled,  taking 
into  consideration  the  long  terms  of  apprentice- 
ship and  the  intelligence  and  skill  demanded  of 
the  printer,  there  can  be  no  room  for  doubt  that 
the  newspaper  printer  is  very  much  underpaid. 
In  our  last  previous  arbitration  with  the  Pub- 
lishers, Mr.  Mitchell,  the  arbitrator,  in  making 
his  award,  says  (page  97,  Arbitration  Proceed- 
ings) : 

"Wages  cannot,  of  course,  be  expected  to 
rise  and  fall  automatically  as  the  cost  of 
living  rises  and  falls,  but  wages  must  bear 
some  relation  to  the  cost  of  the  things  which 
wages  buy;  it  would  seem,  therefore,  that 
when  there  is  an  abnormal  increase  in  the 
cost  of  living  there  should  be  if  not  a  cor- 
responding at  least  a  substantial  advance  in 
wages,  and  this  is  especially  true  if  it  be 
shown,  as  is  the  case  here,  that  the  value 
of  the  article  produced  has  increased  and 
that  thereby  the  proprietor  is  in  a  position 
to  respond  to  the  demand  for  higher  wages." 
No  sane  person  would  deny  that  there  was  and 
is   an   abnormal   increase   in   the   cost   of   living. 

We  have  proved  in  those  proceedings  (as  ad- 
mitted by  Arbitrator  Mitchell)  mat  "the  pro- 
prietor is  in  a  position  to  respond  to  the  demand 
for   higher   wages." 

Notwithstanding  all  this  the  newspaper  prin- 
ters were  awarded  only  $2.50,  this  being  sub- 
sequent to  an  award  of  $2  six  months  previously. 
THIS  TOTAL  OF  $4.50  REPRESENTS  THE 
ONLY  INCREASE  IN  THE  NEWSPAPER 
SCALE  SINCE  1912,  APPROXIMATELY  9 
CENTS   AN   HOUR. 

In  other  words,  .while  it  is  admitted  that  the 
cost  of  living  has  advanced  during  that  time 
from  50  to  100  per  cent.,  the  scale  increase 
granted  to   newspaper  printers  in   the   same  time 


8 


is  less  than  15  per  cent.,  APPROXIMATELY 
9    CENTS   AN    HOUR. 

Statistics  will  show,  and  it  is  only  too  evident 
to  the  wage  earner  in  his  daily  experience,  that 
the  cost  of  living  has  not  receded.  Indeed,  it 
is  authoritatively  shown  that  the  cost  of  living 
is    still    in    the    ascendency. 

AT  THE  TIME  OF  THE  PRESENT  DE- 
MAND FOR  AN  INCREASE  OF  $9  PER 
WEEK  THE  DEPARTMENT  OF  LABOR 
FIGURES  SHOWED  AN  INCREASE  OF  75 
PER  CENT,  in  the  COST  OF  LIVING.  THE 
LATEST  GOVERNMENT  FIGURES  SHOW 
AN  INCREASE  OF  79  PER  CENT.  NEWS- 
PAPER PRINTERS  HAVE  RECEIVED  AN 
INCREASE  (BASED  ON  THE  DAY  SCALE— 
$30)  SINCE  1912  OF  15  PER  CENT.  DE- 
DUCTING THE  15  PER  CENT.  SCALE  IN- 
CREASE RECEIVED  FROM  THE  75  PER 
CENT.  INCREASE  (79  LATER)  IN  THE 
COST  OF  LIVING  SHOWS  THAT  THE 
NEWSPAPER  PRINTER  IS  CARRYING  THE 
BURDEN  OF  A  60  PER  CENT.  INCREASE 
IN  THE  COST  OF  LIVING.  SIXTY  PER 
CENT.  ON  $30— THE  DAY  SCALE  1912-1918 
—IS  $18.  IN  DEMANDING  A  RAISE  OF 
$9  WE  PROPOSE  NOT  TO  BURDEN  THE 
EMPLOYER  WITH  THE  PAYMENT  OF  THE 
60  PER  CENT.  BUT  ARE  WILLING  TO 
ASSUME  THE  LOSS  OF  30  PER  CENT. 
AND  MAKE  THE  MODEST  DEMAND  OF 
30  PER  CENT.— $9. 

The  granting  of  an  increase  of  $9  at  the 
present  time,  in  addition  to  the  scale  raise  pre- 
viously received  would  be  equivalent  to  a  scale 
increase  of  45  per  cent,  on  the  day  scale  (on 
the  night  scale  it  would  be  less)  since  1912, 
while  the  increase  in  the  cost  of  living  has  gone 
up  79  to  more  than  100  per  cent.  During  this 
same  period  the  book  and  job  scale  of  Typo- 
graphical Union  No.  6  has  been  raised  50  per 
cent. 

In  a  list  of  recent  scale  raises,  submitted  by 
the  International  Typographical  Union,  of  the 
70  cities  enumerated,  43  received  a  greater  in- 
crease than  did  New  York.  Six  cities  with 
recent  increases  are  at  present  in  negotiation  for 
additional  increases.  The  following  cities  have 
received   an   increase    of    $6   or   more: 


Akron     

$13.00 

Montreal    .... 

$7.00 

Atlanta     .... 

6.30 

Nashville    

6.00 

Boston     

8.40 

New    Bedford. 

6.00 

Bridgeport     . 

8.00 

Philadelphia.  . 

10.00 

Camden     

6.00 

Pittsburg    

7.65 

Chicago     .... 

8.60 

Providence     . . 

9.00 

Cleveland   .  .  . 

7.20 

Richmond     .  .  . 

8.00 

Columbus   . .  . 

6.50 

Rochester   .... 

9.00 

Dayton    

9.00 

Seattle     

10.50 

Detroit    

7.05 

Tacoma   

12.00 

Fort  Worth .  . 

7.00 

Toledo     

6.25 

Hartford     .  .  . 

6.00 

Washington..  . 

10.50 

Kansas    City. 

6.00 

Youngstown. . 

7.00 

A  comparison  of  the  wages  paid  in  1914  with 
those  of  1919,  to  the  different  crafts  engaged  in 
newspaper  work  in  New  York  city  shows  con- 
clusively that  Typographical  Union  No.  6,  from 
time  immemorial  the  premier  of  the  allied  crafts 
in  the  newspaper  world.  (AND  ADMITTED 
BY  THE  PUBLISHERS  ASSOCIATION 
THAT  IT  SHOULD  BE)  has  fallen  woefully 
in  the  background.  Because  of  the  skill  and 
intelligence  required  of  this  branch  of  news- 
paper work,  printers  always  were  the  highest 
paid.  Today,  leaving  out  the  Paper  Handlers, 
Typographical  Union  is  at  the  bottom  of  the  list 
as  regards  scale  wage. 

THE  ACCOMPANYING  TABLE  REP- 
RESENTS THE  DAY  SCALE  OF  THE  DIF- 
FERENT CRAFTS  WORKING  ON  DAILY 
NEWSPAPERS.  THE  PRESSMEN  WORK 
THE  SAME  NUMBER  OF  HOURS  AS  DOES 
NO.  6  IN  THE  DAYTIME,  BUT  WORK  ONLY 
SIX  HOURS  AT  NIGHT.  THE  PRESS- 
MEN'S SCALE  IS  THE  SAME  FOR  DAY 
AND    NIGHT. 

PHOTO-ENGRAVERS  WORK  THE  SAME 
NUMBER  OF  HOURS  AS  MEMBERS  OF  NO. 
6  IN  THE  DAY.  THEIR  SCALE  FOR 
NIGHT  WORK  IS  $42  FOR  42  HOURS' 
WORK.  PREVIOUSLY  THEIR  SCALE 
HAD  CALLED  FOR  45   HOURS. 


$8.00 
12.00 
13.20 
10.00 


Wage  Scale  Increases  from  1914  to  1919. 

1914  1919     Increase 

*  W  e  b  Pressmen's 

Union    No.    25 $25.00  $33.00 

Paper  Handlers'   Union  16.00  28.00 

Machinist     Union 30.00  43.20 

Photo-Engravers' Union  29.00  39.00 
Typographical        Union 

No.    6 30.00  34.50         4. SO 

*  Since  receiving  the  indicated  increase  of  $8, 
the  Web  Pressmen  have  made  a  demand  for  an 
additional  increase  of  $9.00,  the  case  at  present 
being  in  the  hands  of  an  arbitrator,  from  whom 
a   decision   is   now   awaited. 

From  the  above  table  it  will  be  noted  that 
the  pressmen  have  been  awarded  (irrespective  of 
their  present  negotiations)  AN  INCREASE  OF 
32  PER  CENT. 

The  Paper  Handlers'  Union  have  received  AN 
INCREASE   OF    75    PER    CENT. 

The  Machinist  Union  has  been  awarded  AN 
INCREASE    OF    44    PER    CENT. 

The  Photo-Engravers'  Union  has  been  in  re- 
ceipt  of   an   INCREASE   OF   34   PER   CENT. 

DURING  THIS  TIME,  TYPOGRAPHICAL 
UNION  NO.  6  (NEWSPAPER  BRANCH), 
THE  PREMIER  OF  ALL  THE  ALLIED 
TRADES  IN  THE  NEWSPAPER  WORLD, 
HAS  BEEN  GRANTED  AN  INCREASE  OF  15 
PER    CENT.* 

On  page  4  of  Exhibit  "  B,"  Table  2,  you  will 
note  that  in  New  York  the  percentage  of  in- 
crease in  the  retail  price  of  food  from  September 
15,  1917  to  September  15,  1918,  was  16.5  per 
cent.  This,  according  to  the  same  authority, 
added  to  the  increased  percentage  since  1913, 
brings  the  increased  percentage  to  November, 
1918  to  83  (See  page  27,  Exhibit  "  B  ").  On 
page  7  of  the  same  publication  you  will  note 
that  the  increase  in  rentals  in  New  York  between 
July,  1914,  and  November,  1918,  was  11  to  20 
per  cent.  On  page  10,  second  paragraph,  you 
will  note:  "The  opinion  was  general  that  in  nor- 
mal communities  rents  would  NOT  go  down  until 
prices  of  materials  and  labor  were  reduced." 

It  is  conceded  by  nearly  all  authorities  that 
the  time  for  a  reduction  in  the  price  of  materials 
is  a  far  way  off,  and  as  for  a  reduction  in  the 
price  of  labor,  the  opinion  is  almost  unanimous 
that   that    time   may   never   come. 

On  pages  11  to  18  inclusive,  you  will  note 
the  increase  in  the  price  of  clothing  between 
1914  and  1918.  The  last  paragraph — page  18 — 
concludes  with  the  following  statement: 

"  Since  budgets  based  on  the  cheaper  qual- 
ities (and  that  is  the  grade  the  vast  majority 
of  printers  are  compelled  to  select)  tended 
to  run  somewhat  in  excess  of  90  per  cent., 
the  average  advance  in  the  price  of  clothing 
between  July,  1914,  and  November,  1918.  is 
placed   at   93   per  cent." 

This  advance  is  still  maintained  at  the  present 
time,  with  absolutely  no  prospect  of  any  reduc- 
tion. 

On  page  21,  the  increase  in  the  price  of  an- 
thracite coal  for  New  York,  between  November, 
1914,  and  November,  1918,  is  given  as  38.5  per 
cent. 

On  page  23.  last  paragraph,  you  will  note  that 
the  increased  cost  of  fuel,  heat  and  light  com- 
bined, between  July,  1914,  and  November,  1918, 
is    placed    at    55    per    cent. 

There  are  no  indications  of  the  cost  of  any  of 
these  coming  down.  On  the  contrary,  all  the 
indications  point  to  a  rise  in  cost  of  these  com- 
'modities    in    the    near    future. 

-  In  calling  the  attention  of  the  arbitrator  to 
this  exhibit  as  a  whole  and  the  items  specifically 
mentioned  in  these  papers  in  particular,  we  again 
point  out  the  fact  that  in  all  this  period  the 
total  increase  in  the  wage  of  the  newspaper 
printer  has  been  LESS  THAN  15  PER  CENT., 
OR  APPROXIM.\TELY  9  CENTS  AN   HOUR. 


•  The  increase  for  night  work  (at  which  the 
majority  of  newspaper  printers  work  and  the 
scale  for  which  is  $3  more  than  day  work)  was 
LESS  THAN   15  PER  CENT. 


Monthly  l.tihiT  Kciicxc.  Bureau  of  Labor  Sta- 
tjslics,  February.  I'll?  (Exhibit  C>.  Pages  92- 
93  demonstrate  that  "the  retail  price  of  all  arti- 
cles of  food  combined  for  the  I'nitcd  States  was 
2  per  cent,  higher  on  December  15,  1918,  than 
on  November  15,  191 S" — a  2  per  cent,  rise  in 
one   month   at    the   end   of    1918. 

"Wages  and  the  War  (Exhibit  D).  A  Summary 
of  Recent  Wage  Movements,"  by  Hugh  S.  Hanna 
*nd  W.  Jctt  Lauck,  page  3  and  tables  on  pages 
S.  6,  7  and  S,  show  that  of  all  the  crafts  the 
printers  were  in  receipt  of  the  lowest  wage  in- 
crease. 

This  is  accounted  for  because  "in  some  indus- 
tries, such  as  printing,  the  war  made  no  special 
demands  " 

VET  THE  IN'CREASED  COST  OF  LIVING 
PI.AVS  NO  FAVORITES  IN  ITS  DEMANDS 
ON    THE    WAGE    EARNERS. 

Here%yith  also  we  present  (Exhibit  E)  clip- 
pings of  newspapers  with  reference  to  the  pres- 
ent high  cost  of  living;  also  articles  denoting 
that  there  is  no  immediate  prospect  of  any  re- 
duction in  that  high  cost;  also,  if  anything,  that 
the  increase  promises  to  be  still  greater  in  the 
near  future;  also  the  dire  disasters  wrought  in 
the  ranks  of  the  wage  earner  in  the  enormous 
increase  in  the  cost  of  rentals  now  in  progress 
and  notices  of  still   further  increases  for  October. 

In  this  connection  we  herewith  submit  the 
sworn  affidavit  of  Mr.  V.  Z.  Boyajian,  an 
authority  on  real  estate  conditions  in  New 
York. 

In     re     Application  T 

Newspaper     Printers     for     an  f 
Increase   in   Wages.  J 

State   of   New    York,       I 
City   of    New    York,         }-ss.: 
County  of   New  York,    J 

Vahan  Z.  M.  Boyajian,  being  duly  sworn,  de- 
poses and  says  I  am  in  the  real  estate  business 
and  my  office  is  located  in  the  Singer  Building, 
No.  149  Broadway,  Borough  of  Manhattan,  New 
York  City.  I  am  very  familiar  with  real  estate 
conditions  and,  I  am  an  officer  of  the  Ararat 
Realty  Company,  a  corporation  which  is  the 
owner  and  lessee  of  numerous  apartment  houses 
situated   in   the   City   of   New   York. 

In  ray  opinion  rents  are  going  to  be  increased 
in  the  very  near  future  and  surely  by  October 
1st,  when  new  leases  are  made,  due  to  the  fact 
that  the  general  conditions  warrant  said  in- 
creases.- Labor  is  higher  than  it  was,  and  ma- 
terials used  in  the  maintenance  and  up-keep  of 
the  house  cost  more  than  they  formerly  did, 
and,  furthermore,  the  economic  principle  of  sup- 
ply and  demand  will,  in  my  opinion,  control 
the  real  estate  situation  and  cause  rents  to  be 
materially    increased. 

Vahan  Z.  M.  Boyajian. 
Sworn   to    before    me   this    24th 

day   of   March,    1919. 

M.    Harris. 
(Seal) 

Mr.  PoLACHEK — We  question  the  right  of  Mr. 
Boyajian    to    qualify    as    an    expert. 

Mr.  Oppenheimer — We  have  enough  evidence 
without  his  affidavit;  that  is  only  a  drop  in  the 
bucket. 

Mr.  Rouse — Answering  the  counsel  for  the 
Publishers,  I  wish  to  state  that  if  he  questions 
the  right  of  the  gentleman  to  qualify  as  an 
expert,  surely  he  does  not  question  the  right 
of  the  newspapers  of  New  York  to  qualify  as 
authorities.  They  are  giving  the  public  informa- 
tion which  is  supposed  to  be  truthful,  and  we 
trust  that  they  are  not  in  the  business  of  giving 
out  information  that  is  inaccurate  and  untruth- 
ful and  not  for  the  best  interests  of  the  common 
weal. 

Mr.  Polachek— The  Publishers  would  say,  in 
response  to  that,  that  there  is  a  decided  move- 
ment, as  evidenced  by  the  columns  of  the  press 
in  New  York,  to  take  action,  as  far  as  possible, 
against  what  we  are  now  terming  rent  profiteer- 
ing;   there   is   very   decided   action    pending. 

Mr.  Oppenheimer — The  Publishers  admit  at 
the   same   time   in   their   publications,   as   you   will 


probably   notice   in  some  of  the  clippings  we  have 
here,   that  there  is   no   remedy. 

Mr.  Polachek — We  admit  ther?  is  a  great  deal 
of  rent  profiteering  going  on  at  the  present  time. 

Mr.  Rouse — While  they  question  the  authority 
of  the  gentleman  to  qualify  as  an  expert,  yet 
they  subscribe  to  the  general  statement  that  there 
is  a  tremendous  increase  in  the  cost  of  rentals, 
proving  conclusively  that  the  gentleman  is  cor- 
rect,  whether  he   is   an   expert   or   not. 

Mr.  Oppenheimer — Besides,  he  does  not  state 
it  as  forcibly  as  the  Publishers  themselves  in 
their  publications. 

Mr.  Wardman — The  point  is  that  he  is  trying 
to  rent  real  estate;  he  is  not  a  qualified  witness 
as    an    expert. 

Mr.  Rouse — You  concede  that  the  New  York 
Sun   is   then? 

Mr.  Oppenheimer — I  will  proceed  with  the 
reading  of  our  brief:  (Reading)  In  arbitration 
proceedings  recently  between  the  Publishers  and 
Paper  Handlers,  the  former  made  this  statement: 
"  There  is  no  doubt  that  the  peak  of  war  in- 
flation has  passed  and  the  cost  of  living  is 
slowly  but  surely  on  the  down  grade."  No 
doubt  a  similar  statement  will  be  offered  at  this 
time. 

We  positively  deny  that  the  cost  of  living  has 
started  on  the  down  grade,  we  fail  to  notice  any 
concrete  indication  of  any  such  thing  in  the  near 
future.  In  fact,  all  the  indications  point  in  the 
opposite  direction.  This  is  especially  true  of 
New  York,  where  rents,  already  abnormally  in- 
flated during  the  war,  are  to  be  still  further 
boosted  on  October  1  from  10  to,  in  some  cases, 
35   per   cent. 

In  verification  of  the  still  upward  trend  of  the 
cost  of  living,  we  submit  copies  of  the  "  Curve 
of  the  Food  Cost  of  Living  "  in  the  Annalist, 
a  recognized  authority  on  this  subject  published 
by  the  New  York  Times.  These  charts  prove 
conclusively  that  from  March  1,  1919,  to  March 
29,  1919,  the  cost  of  living  has  been  rising 
steadily,  reaching  its  highest  point  on  the  latter 
date,  in  fact,  the  highest  point  reached  since  the 
upward  movement  began    (Exhibit   F). 

"  An  index  number  is  the  means  of  show- 
ing fluctuations  in  the  average  price  of  a 
group  of  commodities.  The  Annalist  Index 
Number  shows  the  fluctuations  in  the  aver- 
age wholesale  prices  of  twenty-five  food  com- 
modities selected  and  arranged  to  represent 
a  theoretical  family  food  budget. 

The  Annalist  Index   Number— 

For   March   1,    1919 283.640 

For  March   8,    1919 287.461 

For  March    IS,    1919 291.794 

For    March    22,    1919 297.961 

For   March   29,    1919 303.161" 

Mr.  Rouse — I  wish  to  call  particular  attention 
to  the  Annalist  of  New  York,  Monday,  April 
14th,  published  since  this  table  was  prepared. 
You  will  note  that  even  since  we  have  prepared 
this  table  the  Index  Number  shows  311.804;  it 
has  advanced  more  than  8  points  since  this  table 
was  prepared.  I  am  referring  to  the  last  issue 
of   the    Annalist. 

Mr.  Wardman — What  are  those  commodities 
that   you    mention? 

Mr.  Rouse — The  Index  Number  is  the  method 
of  showing  fluctuations  in  the  average  price  of 
a  group  of  commodities.  They  do  not  state  the 
specific  group,  but  this  is  conceded  to  be  one  of 
the   authorities  on  the   question. 

Mr.  Wardman — The  reason  I  ask  is  because 
I  know  in  my  own  house  our  butter  bills  are 
less,  our  grocery  bills  are  less,  eggs  are  almost 
cut  in  half.  I  wonder  what  commodities  they 
use. 

Mr.  Rouse — What  neighborhood  are  you  living 
in? 

Mr.    Wardman — New   Rochelle. 
Mr.    Oppenheimer — I    want    to    move    up    into 
that   neighborhood.      Let   me   say,    Mr.    Wardman, 


10 


that   you   won't   get   those   prices   down   in   Wash- 
ington Market,  where  I  buy  my  stuff. 

Mr.  Morrison — You  better  put  this  in  as  an 
exhibit. 

Mr.    Rouse — It   is    an    exhibit. 
(Marked    Exhibit    F-1.) 

Mr.  Oppenheimer — All  the  Government  Ex- 
hibits we  present  here  show  continual  increase 
in  the  cost  of  living.  I  will  proceed  with  the 
reading   of    our   brief: 

OVERTIME. 

As  stated  before,  the  majority  of  newspaper 
printers  work  at  night;  and  it  is  on  the  night 
shift  that  most  of  the  overtime  occurs. 

It  has  always  been  conceded  that  night  work 
was  much  more  injurious  to  the  workman  than 
work  in  the  daytime. 

Because  of  the  injurious  effects  of  night  work 
on  the  workman,  the  National  War  Labor  Board 
is  granting  a  wage  scale  higher  than  day  work 
in    nearly    all    cases    coming    before    it.      ^ 

In  the  case  of  the  Employees  vs.  Worthington 
Pump  and  Machinery  Corporation,  Cudahy,  Wis- 
consin, Docket  No.  163,  signed  by  Matthew  Hale, 
Umpire  for  the  Board,  Mr.  Hale,  in  declaring 
that  night  work  should  receive  a  larger  compen- 
sation, because  it  involves  a  greater  strain  in 
all  ways  upon  TRe  employee,  cites  portions  of  a 
brief  prepared  by  Supreme  Court  Justice  Louis 
D.  Brahdeis  in  "  The  People  of  the  State  of 
New  York  vs.  C.  S.  Press,"  in  April,  1914,  as 
follows: 

"  The  most  serious  physical  injury  wrought 
by  night  work  is  due  to  the  loss  of  sleep  it 
entails.  This  is  because  recuperation  from 
fatigue  and  exhaustion  takes  place  only  in 
sleep,  and  takes  place  fully  only  in  sleep 
at   night. 

"  The  degree  of  fatigue  developed  was 
greater  during  the  night  shift  than  during 
the    day     «     *     *. 

"  In  the  forefront  of  the  effects  of  night 
work  upon  health  stands,  to  our  mind,  the 
loss  of  night  rest.  Sleep  at  night  is  cer- 
tainly far  preferable  to  sleep  by  day  *  *  * 
"  Workers  who  are  employed  at  night  are 
inevitably  deprived  of  sunlight.  Scientific 
investigation  has  proved  that  the  loss  of 
sunlight  is  injurious  in  two  ways:  First, 
it  results  in  serious  physical  damage,  both 
to  human  beings  and  to  animals.  Night 
workers  whose  blood  was  examined  showed 
a  marked  decrease  in  the  red  coloring 
matter,  resulting  in  a  state  of  chronic  blood 
impoverishment.  Second,  the  loss  of  sun- 
light favors  the  growth  of  bacteria,  such  as 
the  germs  of  tuberculosis.  Conversely,  the 
light  destroys  bacterial  life.  It  has  been 
called  the  cheapest  and  most  universal  dis- 
infectant. 

"  It  has  also  been  shown  that  animals  kept 
in  the  dark  without  sunlight  suffer  a  loss 
of  the  red  coloring  in  the  blood.  The  same 
is  found  true  of  night  workers  who  are 
deprived  of  sunlight;  impoverished  blood  is 
one   of  the  main   symptoms     *     •     •_ 

"  Night  work  often  results  in  life-long 
injury  to  the  eyes.  The  danger  of  eye 
strains  from  close  application  to  work  is 
intensified  at  night  by  insufficient  and  im- 
proper lighting  of  work  rooms.  While  it  is 
true  that  the  more  general  use  of  electric 
lighting  has  lessened  the  vitiation  of  the  air 
due  to  gas  lighting,  yet  it  has  introduced 
new  elements  of  injury.  The  glare  of 
excessive  or  unshaded  lights  may  be  as 
injurious  to  the  eyes  as  insufficient  illumina- 
tion. Moreover,  experience  has  shown  that 
injuries  to  the  eyes  affect  general  health 
disastrously. 

"  The  workers  detest  night  work,  because 
it  is  more  exhausting.  Day  sleep  is  less 
refreshing.  The  number  of  meals  necessary 
in  the  family  budget  is  increased,  extra 
cooking  must  be  done,  and  the  family  order 
and     system     are     disjointed     »     •     •_ 

"Nightwork  and  late  overtime  hours 
prevent   the    workers    from    taking   advantage 


of    the    educational    opportunities    offered    by 
enlightened     communities     such     as     evening 
schools,    public   lectures,    libraries." 
The   Rev.    Charles   Stelzle,   as  arbitrator   in   the 
proceedings   between    the    New   York   Web   Press- 
men's    Union     and    the     Publishers'    Association, 
October  14,   1918,  in  his  decision  had  this  to  say 
regarding    "overtime": 

"  When  a  man  works  overtime  he  gives  an 
equivalent     in     overtaxed     strength     and     de- 
creased    vitality     for    the    extra    amount    of 
money    that    he    receives.     It    is    a    question 
whether    he    does    not    give    more    than    he 
receives." 
In    these   modern   times    everything   makes   for 
speed.     New    machinery    is    constantly    being    in- 
troduced   in    the    composing    rooms    necessitating 
closer    application    on    the    part    of    the    workman 
with    increasing  demand  for  speed. 

The  newspaper  printer,  working  constantly 
under  a  high  tension,  with  its  nerve-racking 
results,  when  called  upon  to  put  in  time  in  addi- 
tion to  his  allotted  night's  work,  is  penalized 
physically  and  mentally  to  such  a  degree  that 
no  increase  in  the  amount  of  pay  for  overtime 
would  be  commensurate  with  the  services  rend- 
ered. 

We  believe,  under  the  circumstances,  that  our 
demand  for  double  price  for  overtime  is  a  just 
one. 

BROOKLYN  BONUS  FOR  SATURDAY  AND 
SATURDAY  NIGHTS. 

(DOUBLE-HEADER.) 

"  All  members  working  Saturday  and  Satur- 
day  night   shall    receive    $1.81    e.xtra." 

Section  32  of  the  Scale  of  Prices  for  News- 
papers   specifies    that 

"  On     morning     and     evening     newspapers 
twelve    hours    must    intervene    between     the 
time    of   quitting   and    starting   work,   but   no 
member    of    the    Union    shall    be    allowed    to 
work  more  than  twelve  hours  in  any  twenty- 
four.     This   shall   not  apply   on   Saturdays  or 
election    day   to    evening   newspapers   publish- 
ing   Sunday    editions    or    to    unusual    emer- 
gencies." 
This   section   was   inserted   in  the  scale   because 
it   was    recognized    by    the    Publishers    as    well    as 
the   members   that  overtime   was  a   hardship;   that 
members,   after    working   their   allotted   time,   day 
or  night,  at  the  constant  strain  and  high  tension 
demanded   of   a    newspaper   printer,   could   not  be 
expected  to   maintain   their  physical   well  being  if 
compelled    to    put    in    extra    time.     Consequently, 
in  order  to   insure  that  members  may  be  enabled 
to  secure  a  fair  amount  of  rest  after  a  day  or  a 
night's    work,    the    section    was    framed    as    above 
and   enacted   into  law. 

But  this  section  is  not  operative  on  Saturdays 
on  evening  newspapers  publishing  a  Sunday 
morning   edition. 

Saturday,  as  is  well  known  in  the  newspaper 
business  is  by  far  the  hardest  day  in  the  %ycek 
on  evening  newspapers.  The  tension,  sufficient- 
ly severe  on  every  other  day  in  the  week,  is 
greatly    increased   on    Saturday. 

This  section  applies  only  to  Brooklyn,  where 
there  are  a  number  of  evening  papers  publishing 
Sunday  morning  editions,  and  where,  consc- 
quently,  members,  after  concluding  thdr  day's 
work  on  Saturdays  at  4  p.  m.,  at  the  increased 
high  tension  alluded  to  above,  are  compelloil, 
WITH  BUT  TWO  HOURS'  INTERMISSION, 
to  return  to  work  at  6  p.  m.  and  resume  their 
labors  for  that  night  in  order  to  get  out  the 
Sunday   morning  edition. 

On  every  day  in  the  week  but  Saturd.iy 
TWELVE  HOURS  MUST  INTERVENE  be- 
twcen  the  time  a  member  leaves  off  work  and 
resumes  the  next  day. 

But  on  the  Brooklyn  papers  affected  by  this 
action  MEMBERS  ARE  COMPELLED  T(3  DO 
TWO  DAYS'  WORK  IN  ONE  with  but  TWO 
hours'    intermission.  ^    •       .       . 

The  demand  of  the  Union  ($1.81)  is  the  day 
rate,  at  single  price,  for  these  two  intervening 
hours,  in  conformity  with  the  demand  of  $9  per 
week  on  the  scale. 

When  it  is  borne  in  mind  that  members  live 
at  great  distances  from  their  places  of  employ- 
ment   it   becomes    obvious    that    members    cannot 


reach  their  homes,  partake  of  some  refreshment 
•nd  return  to  their  duties  in  the  two  hours 
allotted  them.  In  fact,  to  attempt  any  such 
thing  would  put  an  added  strain  upon  the  mem- 
bers and  would  nullify  to  a  ^rrcat  extent  their 
•bihty  to  perforn:  their  duties  in  the  second  part 
of  this   double   header   day. 

The  best  they  can  do  is  to  repair  to  some 
nearby  restaurant,  partake  of  some  refreshment, 
and    await    the    time    to    start    their    work. 

Taking  all  these  matters  into  consideration  wc 
reiterate  that  the  demand  of  $1.81  for  the  inter- 
vening two  hours  of  these  two  days  in  one,  the 
most  strenuou*  of  all  the  week,  is  exceedinKly 
moderate. 

Now.  then,  as  to  the  Publishers:  We  wi*;h  to 
particularly  call  the  attention  of  the  arbitrator 
to  the  f.act  that  in  all  previous  scale  negotiations 
between  the  Publishers'  Association  and  No.  6 
the  claim  has  always  been  made  that  it  was  im- 
possible to  accede  to  the  demands  without  dis- 
astrous results  to  the  newspapers;  that  most  of 
the  papers  were  losing  money,  and  that  to  award 
any  substantial  increase  in  wage  would  result 
•»  tbe  suspension  of  one  or  more  newspapers. 

During  the  newspaper  scale  negotiations  be- 
tween the  Publishers  and  No.  6,  prior  to  January, 
191S,  at  which  time  a  $2  increase  was  granted,' 
the  Brooklyn  Times  was  specifically  mentioned 
by  the  Publishers  as  being  unable  to  stand  the 
raise  and  a  calamitous  ending  for  the  paper  was 
predicted.  On  July  1.  1918,  an  additional  $2.50 
was  granted  the  newspaper  printers.  Since  this 
last  increase  the  Brooklyn  Times  has  published 
the  following,  which  we  respectfully  submit  for 
the  Arbitrator's  consideration.  This  is  but  one 
of  the  numerous  examples  of  statements  made 
by  the  publishers  in  scale  negotiations  and  later 
refuted  in  printed  announcements  by  individual 
publications.      (Exhibit  G.) 

No  doubt  we  will  be  confronted  with  the  same 
line  of  argument  at  this  time.  But  at  no  time 
have  the  facts  justified  such  statements,  and  at 
no   time   has   the   prophecy   been    fulfilled. 

At  this  point  we  wish  to  lay  particular  stress 
upon  the  proposition  that  if  there  should  possibly 
be  a  paper  (which  we  do  not  admit)  that  is 
working  upon  a  non-paying  basis,  such  an  al- 
leged fact  should  not  militate  against  the  grant- 
ing of  an   adequate   relief. 

According  to  testimony  furnished  by  the  Pub- 
lishers themselves,  at  no  time  was  the  news- 
paper business  _  as  prosperous  as  at  present. 
Advertising  is  increasing  in  volume  and  rates 
have  been  raised;  the  price  per  copy  has  been 
raised,  and,  we  confidently  believe,  is  to  be 
raised  again;  "mat"  service,  formerly  furnished 
by  the  Publishers,  for  25  cents,  has  been  raised 
to   $1. 

In  the  March  ISth  issue  of  the  Editor  and 
Publisher  (Exhibit  H),  on  page  13,  is  an  article 
entitled  "  Advertising  Grows  Over  the  Country," 
it  is  stated  that  "  both  newspaper  publishers  and 
advertising  agencies  also  forecast  a  continuance 
of  the  increase  shown,  and  prohpesied  large 
business  for  newspapers  throughout  the  vear 
1919." 

In  a  table  appearing  on  the  same  page  which 
fives  the  number  of  agate  lines  of  advertising 
run  in  the  month  of  February,  1918  and  1919, 
the  following  results  for  the  New  York  newspa- 
pers are   set  forth : 


Name  of 
Paper. 1919. 

American     ...  672,536 

Bklyn.     Eagle.  700,924 

Commercial     .  142,888 

Eve.    Journal.  640,032 

Eve.     Mail 301,236 

Eve.    Post 299,354 

Eve.     Sun 538,396 

Eve.  Telegram  625,818 

Eve.    World...  456,648 

Globe    519,260 

Herald    571,108 

S  t  a  ndard 

Union     434,374 

Sun     372,524 

Times     1,202,332 

Tribune     405,508 

World     1,134,494 


1918. 


Increase  Loss 
Over  Over 
1918.         1918. 


612,015 

60,521   

599,996 

100,928   

128,420 

14,468   

472,469 

167,563   

335,534 

34,298 

264,650 

34,704   

292,205 

246,191   

478,660 

147,158   

312,732 

143,916   

347,256 

172,004   

433,449 

137,659  

391,380 

42,994  

237,006 

135,518  

854,249 

348,083   

258,980 

146,528   

896,413 

238,081   

This  large  increase  in  the  volume  of  advertis- 
ing shows  that  the  New  York  newspapers  gener- 
ally are  doing  a  much  larger  amount  of  business 
tins  year  than  they  were  last  year,  and  that 
with  the  bright  outlook  for  still  further  increased 
business  predicted  by  the  Editor  and  Publisher, 
there  should  be  no  question  about  their  ability 
to  pay  a  fair  rate  of  wages  to  their  employees. 

Specific  evidence  of  the  increase  in  the  vol- 
ume of  business  now  being  enjoyed  by  individual 
newspapers  is  indicated  by  an  advertisement  of 
the  New  York  World  appearing  on  page  17  of 
the  January  11th  issue  ot  the  Editor  and  Pub- 
lisher (Exhibit  I),  which  states  that  during  the 
year  1918  the  World  printed  210,712  more  ads 
than  its  best  previous  record,  and  on  page  23 
(Exhibit  J)  of  the  same  issue  an  advertisement 
of  the  New  York  Times  states  that  the  increase 
in  the  number  of  agate  lines  of  advertising  dur- 
ing the  year  1918  was  992,357  lines  over  the  pre- 
ceding year,  and  the  increase  for  1918  over  1914 
was    4,353,328    agate    lines. 

In  addition  to  the  increased  volume  of  adver- 
tising secured  by  all  of  the  New  York  news- 
papers we  respectfully  remind  the  arbitrator  that 
the  large  increased  revenues  brought  about  by 
advancing  the  sale  prjce  of  the  papers  from  1  to 
2  cents  (125  per  cent,  net)  is  still  in  evidence; 
that  the  large  saving  of  print  paper  cost  by 
eliminating  returns  and  reducing  the  amount 
of  reading  matter  is  still  being  continued;  and 
that  these  economies  and  increased  sources  of 
revenues  amount  to  many  millions  of  dollars  in 
increased   profits. 

In  connection  with  the  foregoing  there  seems 
to  be  a  well  defined  rumor  that  the  price  of  the 
daily  newspaper  is  to  be  still  further  increased, 
a  hint  to  that  effect  being  thrown  out  to  the 
public  by  an  editorial  in  one  of  the  most  influen- 
tial daily  newspapers  of  New  York,  published  on 
April   5,    1919. 

We  shall  prove,  by  documentary  evidence,  that 
advertising  rates  have  been  increased  from,  time 
to  time  since  1918  and  are  still  increasing;  and 
that,  notwithstanding  this  increase  in  rates  for 
advertising,  at  no  time  have  newspapers  pub- 
lished the  amount  of  advertising  they  do  than 
at  the  present,  in  instances  the  volume  of  adver- 
tising being  of  such  extent  as  to  necessitate  the 
rejection  of  a  considerable  amount  for  want  of 
space.      (See   Exhibit  K.) 

The  increased  rates  for  advertising  in  the 
various  New  York  Newspapers,  as  submitted  by 
the  Union  in  its  last  previous  arbitration  pro- 
ceedings, not  contradicted  by  the  Publishers, 
were  from  25  to  120  per  cent.  Since  that  time 
the  rate  for  certain  classes  of  advertisements  has 
still    further    advanced. 

Following  is  an  extract  from  copy  of  last 
previous  arbitration  proceedings  (page  9)  in 
July,  1918.  The  last  column,  April,  1919,  has 
been    added    since. 

"  Mr.    Rouse — Also     1912    rate    and    1918 
rate   of   the    New    York   Times. 

(Marked    Union    Exhibit    No.    13,    July    2, 
1918,   and   is   as   follows): 

NEW    YORK    TIMES. 


Jan. 
1912. 


June       April 
1918.      1919. 


Help  Wanted,  per  line.  . 
Sits.  Wanted,  per  line.. 
Apts.  to  Let  and  Wanted, 

per    line    

Bus.    0pp.    and    Notices, 

per   line    

Boarders       Wanted, 

Rooms,    etc.,    per    line 
Country  Board,  per   line 
Resorts,    per    line...... 

Lost  and  Found,  per  line 


,15 
.15 


.20 
.30 


).30 
.25 


.42 
.50 


$0.35 
.30 


.45 


.50 


.15 

.30 

.35 

.20 

.42 

.45 

.25 

.42 

.45 

.30 

.50 

.50 

Mr.  Rouse — I  wish  to  call  the  Arbitrator's 
attention  to  the  next  Exhibit,  which  is  Exhibit 
L.  This  is  one  of  the  most  recent  papers  affiliat- 
ing with  the  Publishers'  Association  of  the  City 
of  New  York  and  it  is  also  one  of  the  smallest; 
it  is  the  French  paper  known  as  the  Courier  des 
Etats    Unis,   and    we    show   the    increase    there. 


12 


(Mr.  Oppenheimer  continues  reading  as  fol- 
lows) : 

"  Following  is  a  statement  received  from 
Mr.  F.  M.  Lobit,  chairman.  Courier  des  Etats 
Unis   (Exhibit  L.) 

"  Increase  of  advertising-  rates  in  Septem- 
ber or   October,    1918,  40   per   cent. 

"  Daily,    from    12  cents  to   20   cents. 

"  Sunday,    from    15    cents   to    25    cents. 

"  Weekly,    unknown. 

"  Courier    des    Etats    Unis. 
F.    M.    Lobit." 
Also   are  submitted  advertising   rate  cards  with 
notations    of    increase    of    the    New    York    Times, 
New     York     Herald     and     New     York     Evening 
Telegram.      (Exhibit    M.) 

Mr.  PoLACHEK — I  want  to  know  why  they 
do  not  show  increases  in  rates  on  all  the  papers. 
If  that  is  a  matter  of  evidence  affecting  the  en- 
tire Publishers'  Association  you  ought  to  show  it 
on  all  the  papers. 

Mr.  Rouse — I  think,  Mr.  Morrison,  that  we 
could  do  that  if  the  Publishers'  Association 
would  be  magnanimous  enough  to  permit  their 
business  offices  to  give  us  the  necessary  in- 
formation. 

Mr.  PoLACHEK — I  want  to  state  as  I  stated  to 
Arbitrator  in  the  previous  case,  that  the  rate 
cards  of  all  the  newspapers  are  available  to  any- 
body; we  give  them  out  broadcast. 

Mr.  Wardman — They  lay  on  the  counter  there. 

Mr.  PoLACHEK — They  lay  on  the  counter  and 
we  do  business  on  them. 

Mr.  Rouse — I  have  endeavored  to  get  them 
and  cannot  get  them. 

Mr.  Waruman— Did  you  ever  endeavor  to  get 
one   of  the   Sun's? 

Mr.  Polachek — Have  you  ever  asked  for  a 
rate  card  of  the  New  York  American? 

Mr.  Wardman — A  boy  from  the  street  can 
walk  in  and  get  it. 

Mr.  Polachek — I  can  give  you  every  rate 
card  for  the  last  10  or  15  years. 

Mr.  Rouse — I  would  be  very  glad  to  have  it 
to  submit  in  evidence,  if  you  will  furnish  it  to 
me;   I  cannot  get  it. 

Mr.  Morrison — The  statement  seems  to  be 
that  rate  cards  can  be  furnished.  You  can  sub- 
mit them  yourself,  as  a  part  of  your  case,  Mr. 
Polachek,  or  you  can  furnish  them  to  Mr.  Rouse 
so  that  he  can  submit  them. 

Mr.  Rouse — I  would  be  glad  to  have  the  for- 
mer rate  card  of  the  Sun  and  the  former  rate 
card  of  the  American.  I  would  like  to  ask  Mr. 
Polachek  what  the  advertising  rates  for  amuse- 
ments ads  of  the  New  York  American  are  at 
the  present  time;  what  is  the  per  line  rate? 

Mr.  Polachek — 60  cents  in  the  Daily  Amer- 
ican. 

Mr.  Rouse — What  is  the  rate  for  the  evening 
paper? 

Mr.   Polachek — 75   cents. 

Mr.   Rouse — What  was  the   former  rate? 

Mr.  Polachek — I  don't  know  when  that  has 
been  changed — not  in  years.  The  advertising 
rate  in  the  Sunday  American  was  changed  this 
year. 

Mr.  Rouse — What  is  the  rate  for  the  Sunday 
American? 

Mr.  Polachek — It  was  raised  from  75  cents  to 
90  cents  per  agate  line  this  year  on  the  basis 
of  a  280,000  circulation  gain.  That  was  more 
service  for  the  money  which  cost  us  that  much 
more  to  print. 

Mr.  Rouse — I  think  the  Publishers  will  admit 
without  all  this  talk,  that  there  has  been  a  gen- 
eral  increase   in   advertising  rates. 

Mr.  Polachek — There  have  been  some  in- 
creases, but  I  want  to  call  the  attention  of  the 
Arbitrator  to  the  fact  that  the  classifications  in 
which  they  show  such  incteases  were  kinds  of 
advertising  which  constitute  the  smallest  possible 
volume  of  the  advertising  which  newspapers 
print;  they  do  not  show  what  the  increases  were 
in  the  advertising  which  constitutes  the  ^reat 
volume;  in  other  words,  the  display  advertising 
in  the  newspapers. 


Polachek — One    to    one    and    a    quarter 
Rouse — It  is  pretty  profitable  at  90  cents 


Mr.  Rouse — Do  you  call  amusements  ads  the 
smallest    part? 

Mr.  Polachek — Yes,  one  of  the  smallest. 

Mr.   Rouse — For  a  Sunday  edition? 

Mr.  Polachek — The  amusement  advertising 
in  the  Sunday  papers  does  not  constitute  S  per 
cent,  of  the   Sunday  paper  revenue. 

Mr.  Rouse — How  many  pages  are  covered  with 
amusement  ads? 

Mr. 
pages. 

Mr. 
a  line. 

Mr.  Polachek — We  do  not  lose  money  at  it, 
of  course. 

Mr.  Wiley — There  was  a  reference  made  there 
to  increase  in  the  Want  advertising  rates  of  the 
Times  from  15  cents  a  line;  that  is  away  below 
the  cost  of  production  of  a  line  of  advertising;  it 
was  only  done  as  a  beginning  on  that  Want  busi- 
ness and  as  the  business  grew,  the  rate  was 
steadily  increased.  Even  now  it  is  not  a  very 
profitable  rate. 

Mr.  Rouse — -I  would  like  to  ask  the  counsel 
for  the  Publishers  if  it  is  not  generally  con- 
ceded that  they  anticipate  a  further  increase 
in  their   rates   in   September? 

Mr.    Polachek — In    advertising    rates? 

Mr.   Rouse — Yes. 

Mr.  Polachek — I  don't  know  anything  'about 
it.  Every  paper  handles  that  matter  for  it- 
self.    We   do   not. 

Mr.  Rouse — You  admit  a  general  increase  on 
the  American? 

Mr.  Polachek — I  will  admit  there  are  some 
increases,  but  I  am  sure  they  are  very  small. 
You  have  cited  examples  which  tend  to  in- 
crease from  50  to  100  and  150  per  cent.  There 
has   nothing   ever   happened   like   that. 

Mr.  Wiley — The  general  advertising  rate  of 
the  New  York  World  at  40  cents  a  line  has 
been    carried    to    my    knowledge    for    20    years. 

Mr.  Marquart — What  Mr.  Rouse  meant  to 
ask  was  this,  is  it  not  true  that  you  contem- 
plate raising  your  advertising  rates  on  the 
amusement    ads    in    the    Sunday    American? 

Mr.    Polachek — No,   we   do   not. 

Mr.  Rouse — They  have  just  raised  them  from 
75  to  90  cents  an  agate  line,  which  is  profitable. 

Mr.  Polachek — The  amusement  advertising  is 
less  than  5  per  cent,  of  the  business. 

Mr.  Rouse — It  is  very  profitable,  though,  at 
90  cents  an  agate  line.  The  World  has  in- 
creased its  rates;  they  have  got  a  new  rate 
card  in  contemplation;  it  is  set  up  in  the  com- 
posing room.  Do  you  think  I  could  get  that? 
I  couldn't  get  it  in  a  thousand  years. 

Mr.  Polachek — But  you  are  not  entitled  to 
anything  until  it  is  published. 

Mr.  Rouse — I  want  to  be  fair  all  the  way 
through  these  proceedings  and  i  want  to  say 
for  the  benefit  of  the  Arbitrator  that  the  nego- 
tiations preceding  our  coming  here  have  been 
the  most  harmonious  and  friendly  between  this 
Union  that  we  represent  and  the  Publishers 
that  have  been  conducted  in  many  years.  What 
I  am  going  to  say,  now,  however,  I  want 
omitted   from  the  record. 

(Discussion  off  the  record.) 

Mr.  Wardman— The  Publishers  object  to  Mr. 
Rouse  trying  to  give  the  impression  that  we 
are  trying  to  conceal  our  rate  cards  from  their 
Committee  when  we  do  not  try  to  conceal  them 
from    anybody    on    the    face    o£   the    earth. 

Mr.  Polachek— The  rate  card  is  the  thing 
on    which    we    do    business. 

Mr  Rouse— Mr.  Wardman  has  misunderstood 
me;  what  I  said  was  this:  That  we  perhaps 
could  get  the  present  rate  card  but  we  could 
not  get  the  rate  card  preceding  the  present  one; 
that   is  the  one  I   am   talking  about. 

Mr.  Wardman— That  would  not  be  lying  on 
the    desk,    of    course. 


13 


Mr.  PoLACHiK — Current  rate  cards  are  on 
the  counter;  past  rate  cards  are  in  the  pub- 
lisher'* otTice  and  can  be  obtained.  I  have  a 
complete  tile  of  them  in  my  otlice. 

Mr.  Koi'SE — But  1  could  not  get  the  previous 
one   with   which   to   make   my   comparison. 

Mr.  Morrison — I  think  the  representative  of 
the  I'ublishers  can  very  easily  make  the  state- 
ment to  set  the  Arbitrator's  mind  at  rest  in  re- 
gard  to   rates. 

Mr.  Wiley — It  was  perfectly  proper  and 
natural  for  the  Union  to  present  the  best  E.x- 
hibits  they  could.  The  point  is  that  some 
newspapers   have    not   raised    their   rates. 

Mr.  RorsE — I  have  not  presented  those  for 
the  American  or  the  Journal.  I  knew  that 
their  advertising  rates  had  increased  on  amuse- 
ment ads  from  75  cents  to  90  cents  per  agate 
line  but  I  could   not  obtain   the  evidence. 

Mr.  PoLACHEK — What  did  it  increase  on  the 
dry  goods  advertising,  which  is  the  bulk  of  our 
business? 

Mr.   Rouse — I   could  not   say. 
Mr.  Pou^cHEK — 1  will  tell  you;  they  increased 
it  37c. 

Mr.  Rouse — Then  you  simply  substantiate 
our  statement  that  there  has  been  a  general 
increase  in  some  classes;  we  do  not  say  in  all 
classes. 

Mr.  Oppenheimer — That  is  the  statement 
made  in  this  paper  and  nothing  else  has  been 
read  here.  There  has  been  an  increase  in 
some  classes  of  advertising.  That  is  the  state- 
ment that   is  made. 

Mr.  Wiley — Some  papers  have  and  some  have 
not. 

Mr.  Rouse — I  am  willing  to  let  that  go  just 
as  it  lays.  You  simply  subscribe  to  our  state- 
ment. We  said  in  some  classes,  not  in  all 
classes. 

Mr.  PoLACHEK — There  is  no  occasion  for  any 
excitement    over    it. 

Mr.  Rouse — There  is  not  any  excitement. 
We  simply  want  to  put  something  into  the 
record   for   the   Arbitrator. 

Mr.  Oppenheimer — (Reading):  "Following  is 
copy  of  report  submitted  by  Chairman  Tom 
Kenney,   of  the  Brooklyn  Eagle: 

"Sunday    Eagle    advanced    from    3    to    5 

cents   on    Nov.    10,    1918. 
"Situation    wanted    Ads    advanced    66  2-^ 

per   cent,   in  price. 
"Gen.     Ads     increase     2     cents     per     line. 
"Amusement    Ads    increase     Sc.     per    line. 

"Classified    Ads   about    par    with    1917. 
"Capital    stock    of     Eagle    increased    from 
$100,000      to      $1,500,000.     This      shows      at 
$1,000     per     share     previously    to     be    worth 
$15,000  at  present." 
It    is    only    too    well    known    that    circulation 
and     advertising     are     not     the     only     source     of 
revenue    of    a    newspaper.     Many    of    our    news- 
papers   furnish    an    out    of    town    service,    termed 
"syndicate"    work,    from    which    a    considerable 
revenue   is  derived. 

Almost  every  newspaper  in  New  York,  in  ad- 
dition to  its  own  work,  does  syndicate  work 
for  a  number  of  dailies  in  all  sections  of  the 
country.  This  is  a  source  of  considerable 
revenue  to  the  newspapers  of  New  York  and  is 
accomplished  with  but  little  expense  to  the  pub- 
lishers. This  work  is  performed  by  members 
of  the  regular  force,  during  the  slack  part  of 
the  day  that  occurs  in  every  office,  and  does 
not  necessitate  the  hiring  of  any  additional  men 
more  than  are  necessary  to  get  out  the  paper. 
That  is  to  say,  if  newspapers  did  no  syndicate 
work  whatever,  they  would  employ  the  same 
number  of  men  they  do  at  present,  because  the 
number  of  men  employed  is  no  more  than 
sufficient  to  get  out  their  own  publications. 
And  when  it  is  borne  in  mind,  that  a  single 
identical  page  of  this  so-called  syndicate  work 
is  supplied  to  any  number  of  out  of  town 
newspapers,  the  only  change  on  each  page  being 
the  substitution  of  one  headline  for  another, 
the  profit  to  the  employer  is  at  once  apparent. 
IN  THE  PARLANCE  OF  THE  TRADE  THIS 
IS  TERMED  "PHAT"  OR  "PICK-UP". 


As  is  well  known,  between  January,  1918,  and 
July,  1918,  the  New  York  newspapers  increased 
their  rates  to  2  cents  per  copy  (former  rate  1 
cent)  and  receive  $1.25  per  100  net,  where 
formerly  they  received  but  50  cents  net.  Thus 
from  circulation  alone  their  income  has  increased 
125  per  cent,  since   1918. 

Conditions  in  composing  rooms  through  this 
jurisdiction  are  such  that  in  nearly  every 
newspaper  plant  there  is  a  cry  of  "not  enough 
men."  The  amount  of  work  done  in  the  com- 
posing rooms  of  New  York  has  increased  to 
such  an  extent  that  forces  are  enlarged  to  the 
capacity  of  the  office,  and  even  with  these  large 
forces  men  are  compelled  to  work  many  hours 
overtime. 

WE  WISH  ALSO  TO  CALL  TO  THE  AT- 
TENTION OF  THE  ARBITER  THE 
FACT  THAT  NEW  YORK  CITY  IS  NOW 
100  PER  CENT.  UNION  IN  THE  NEWS- 
PAPER BRANCH.  THE  SOURCE  OF  COM- 
PETITION BY  NON-UNION  NEWSPAPERS 
PAYING  LESS  THAN  THE  UNION  SCALE 
HAS  BEEN  REMOVED  BY  UNIONIZING 
THE  NEW  YORK  EVENING  POST  AND 
THE  NEW  YORK  COMMERCIAL,  THUS 
PLACING  EVERY  MORNING  AND  EVE- 
NING NEWSPAPER  IN  NEW  YORK  ON 
THE  SAME  BASIS  AS  FAR  AS  WAGE 
SCALE  IS  CONCERNED. 

In  conclusion,  we  pray  that  the  increases  de- 
manded  be   awarded   because: 

Firjt— NEWSPAPER  PRINTERS  AT  NO 
TIME  HAVE  RECEIVED  THE  WAGE  COM- 
MENSURATE WITH  THE  INTELLIGENCE 
AND    SKILL   REQUIRED. 

Second — That  since  1913  the  cost  of  living  has 
risen  to  more  than  79  per  cent.,  during  which 
time  the  wage  of  the  newspaper  printer  has 
advanced  but  15  per  cent.,  approximately  9  cents 
an   hour. 

Third — That  despite  the  fact  that  the  news- 
paper printer  is  at  the  present  carrying  a  bur- 
den of  more  than  60  per  cent,  rise  in  the  cost 
of  living  our  demand  is  equivalent  to  less  than 
one-half  of  this   burden — 30   per   cent. 

Fourth — Unless  this  relief  is  granted  the 
newspaper  printer  must  abandon  that  standard 
of  living  he  has  attained  for  many  years. 

Fifth — The  increase  of  but  15  per  cent,  since 
1912  (approximately  9  cents  per  hour)  is 
ridiculous  in  comparison  to  the  percentage  of 
increase  granted  other  workers  in  allied  trades 
connected    with    the    newspapers. 

Sixth — The  increase  of  IS  per  cent,  since  1912 
is  ridiculously  small  in  comparison  with  other 
trades,  skilled  and  unskilled,  throughout  the 
country. 

Seventh — The  cost  of  living  is  still  in  the 
ascendency. 

Eighth — The  newspapers  of  New  York  never 
were  as  prosperous  as  to-day;  circulations  are 
increasing  despite  the  fact  that  the  price  of  the 
papers  has  been  doubled;  advertising  has_  in- 
creased, despite  the  fact  that  rates  have  been 
raised,  to  such  an  extent  that  some  of  the  daily 
papers  have  been  compelled  to  omit  many 
columns    per   day. 

We  pray  that  the  increase  to  $1.81  for  the 
two  hours  intervening  in  the  double-header  day 
in  Brooklyn  be  granted,  as  this  rate  is  but 
single  price  based  on  the  $9  a  week  prayed 
for. 

We  pray  that  our  demand  for  double  price  for 
overtime  be  granted  for  the  reasons  set  forth 
in  this  brief.  The  need  for  relief  in  this  mat- 
ter has  been  admitted  from  time  to  time  by  the 
publishers. 

We  call  especial  attention  to  the  fact  that 
there  are  but  three  issues  presented  by  the 
Union   that   the   arbitrator   must    decide. 

First — Wages.  We  have  shown  by  Govern- 
ment and  other  authoritative  statistics,  that  the 
cost  of  living  is  still  in  the  ascendency.  We 
have  shown  that  since  1913  the  cost  of  living 
has  risen  to  more  than  79  per  cent,  during 
which  time  the  newspaper  printers  have  received 
an  increase  of  IS  per  cent,  and  less.  We  have 
shown  that  while  we  are  now  carrying  a  burden 
of  more  than  60  per  cent,  in  the  cost  of  living, 
our    demand    for    a    $9    increase    is    but    30    per 


14 


cent,  of  this  60  per  cent.,  and  if  granted,  will 
amount  to  (with  the  15  per  cent,  already 
granted)  45  per  cent,  as  against  an  increase  in 
the  cost  of  living  of  more  than  79  per  cent, 
since  1913.  For  these  reasons  and  the  others 
enumerated  in  our  brief,  we  pray  the  arbitrator 
to    grant    our    demand. 

Second — Overtime.  Overtime  is  an  abomina- 
tion. It  has  been  admitted  by  the  publishers, 
and  a  modification  of  the  section  referring  to 
overtime  had  been  tentatively  agreed  to  by  the 
publishers.  Statistics  prove  that  overtime  re- 
duces the  vitality  of  the  member.  It  increases 
the  mortality  rate.  For  these  reasons  and  the 
others  enumerated  in  our  brief,  we  pray  the 
arbitrator  to   grant   our   demand. 

Third — The  bonus  of  $1.81  in  Brooklyn  for 
the  two-hour  swing  between  4  and  6  on  the 
double-header  day  on  Saturday.  Single  price 
for  the  two-hour  intermission  in  the  TWO-DAY- 
IN-ONE  WORKDAY.  We  believe  in  this  case 
our  request  is  extraordinarily  moderate  and  for 
this  reason  and  the  ones  enumerated  in  our 
brief,  we  pray  the  arbitrator  to  grant  our 
demand. 

Mr.  Oppenheimer^ — That  concludes  our  first 
paper. 

Mr.   Rouse— The   Union   rests   for   the  present. 

Mr.  Morrison — I  might  say  that  I  propose  to 
refrain  from  asking  any  question  on  the  state- 
ments made  either  by  the  Union  or  the  Pub- 
lishers, until  after  the  Publishers'  statement  is 
read,  because  perhaps  what  I  might  have  in 
mind  will  be  thoroughly  explained  by  the  Pub- 
lishers'   statement. 

Mr.  Wardman — And  will  probably  be  debated 
by   both   counsel   in   the   rebuttal   and   sur-rebuttal. 

Mr.  Morrison— -I  will  therefore  hear  from  the 
Publishers. 

Mr.  PoLACHEK — Before  beginning  to  read  this 
statement  of  the  Publishers,  I  want  to  say  first 
that  the  relations  between  the  Publishers  and  the 
Typographical  Union  are  of  a  most  friendly  and 
cordial  nature.  We  have  been  in  negotiation 
on  this  scale  for  a  period  of  a  number  of  weeks 
during  which  time  we  have  had  numerous  ses- 
sions in  which  the  greatest  friendliness  pre- 
vailed at  all  times;  there  was  no  acrimony  or 
animosity  or  anything  else  that  led  to  the  sub- 
mission of  this  issue  to  an  Arbitrator.  It  was 
concluded  that  that  was  the  best  way  to  settle 
it  to  the  satisfaction  of  all  parties — to  the  satis- 
faction of  the  membership  of  the  Union  which 
this  Committee  represents  and  to  the  member- 
ship of  the  Publishers  which  this  Publishers' 
Committee  represents.  The  Publishers  have  at 
all  times  been  willing  and  ready  to  meet  the 
Union  half  way  on  the  question  of  this  problem 
of  the  cost  of  living.  Of  course,  there  have 
been  divergences  of  opinions  on  the  subject  of 
what  was  necessary  to  meet  this  thing  but  the 
general  principle  was  recognized.  There  have 
been  a  number  of  statements  made  about  news- 
papers pleading  poverty  and  giving  other  causes 
for  not  increasing  wages.  Obviously,  the  news- 
paper has  in  every  instance  suffered  from  exactly 
the  same  thing  that  the  individual  has  suffered 
from.  Everything  with  which  it  deals  has  had 
the  same  record  with  reference  to  advancing 
prices.  It  has  gone  sky-high  in  some  instances 
and  not  so  high  in  others,  but  the  general  ten- 
dency has  been  to  increase  its  expenses.  The 
Publishers  have  met  with  all  the  Unions  and 
they  deal  with  approximately  21  Trade  Unions, 
have  met  with  all  the  Unions  in  the  spirit  of 
trying  to  get  together  with  them  to  the  limit  of 
their  means  and  their  own  possibilities  so  as  to 
alleviate  the  conditions  under  which  the  men 
existed.  The  Typographical  Union  has  pre- 
sented the  cases  of  other  organizations  having 
received  much  larger  increases.  The  Publishers 
freely  admit  that  fact,  but  merely  say  to  the 
Arbitrator  that  in  a  number  of  cases — most 
notably  in  cases  such  as  the  Paper  Handlers,  in- 
volving an  increase  from  $16  to  $28 — the  Pub- 
lishers have  voluntarily  granted  increases  up  to 
$24  and  the  final  arbitration  brought  them  up 
to  $28.  But  we  felt  that  no  matter  what  kind  of 
work  a  man  was  doing,  that  there  was  a  certain 
amount  of  money  that  was  necessary  to  estab- 
lish  a   minimum    whereby   such   a   man    could    be 


secure  in  receiving  enough  money  to  meet  the 
daily  necessities  of  life.  Thus  we  increased  the 
minimums  in  the  drivers'  scale  from  $17  to  $20 
first,  then  to  $22,  then  to  $24;  and  the  same 
thing  was  done  with  the  paper  handlers;  the 
same  thing  was  done  with  the  Mailers  and  Deliv- 
erers Union,  neither  of  which  have  in  any  case 
found  it  necessary  to  go  to  arbitration.  We 
have  settled  by  conciliation  all  those  difficulties. 
I  merely  state  that  Mr.  Arbitrator,  in  order  to 
show  you  the  spirit  in  which  the  Publishers  ap- 
proached these  problems,  which  were  the  prob- 
lems of  every  man  who  was  doing  business.  At 
the  last  arbitration  we  threshed  over  the  same 
ground  in  very  much  the  same  way  as  it  is 
being  gone  over  to-day  and  many  of  the  argu- 
ments presented  then  are  the  same  arguments 
that  are  presented  now.  I  merely  want  to 
state  that  as  a  preamble  to  the  argument  that 
I  am  about  to  make  on  behalf  of  the  Publishers. 
(Reads  as   follows). 

"  Less  than  one  year  ago,  in  July,  1918,  the 
New  York  Publishers'  Association  and  New  York 
Typographical  Union  No.  6  submitted  to  arbi- 
tration, the  question  of  wages  and  working  con- 
ditions in  newspaper  offices  in  New  York  and 
Brooklyn. 

The  Arbitrator  in  this  case  was  the  Hon.  John 
Mitchell. 

The  Union,  at  that  time,  presented  a  demand 
for  $36  per  week  basis  for  day  work  and  $39 
per   week    for    night   work. 

In  rendering  his  decision  on  the  question  of 
wages,  Mr.  Mitchell  said:  "Wages  cannot,  of 
course,  be  expected  to  rise  and  fall  auto- 
matically as  the  cost  of  living  rises  and  falls, 
Ijut  wages  must  bear  some  relation  to  the  cost 
of  things  which  wages  buy.  It  would  seem, 
therefore,  that  when  there  is  an  abnormal  in- 
crease in  the  cost  of  living,  there  should  be,  if 
not  a  corresponding,  at  least  a  substantial  ad- 
vance in  wages."  ,  ,  .  hi  ht-.  u  n 
This  opinion  was  rendered  by  Mr.  Mitchell 
early  in  August,  1918,  only  three  months  before 
the  armistice  was  signed  and  the  World  War 
came  to  an  end  and  at  a  time  when  the  prices 
of  all  things  entering  into  the  cost  of  Hying  had 
reached   almost  the  maximum   of   war  altitudes. 

Mr.  Mitchell  said:  "Taking  into  account  the 
abnormal  increase  in  the  cost  of  living,  the  wage 
increases  that  have  been  granted  in  practically 
every  branch  of  industry  and  the  evidence  of 
increased  revenues  received  by  the  Publishers,  it 
seems  to  me  clearly  to  be  the  duty  of  the  Arbi- 
trator to  award  an  advance  in  wages  of  $2.50 
per  week." 

This  $2.50  award  was  on  top  of  $2  granted 
by  the  Publishers  on  January  1  of  the  same  year, 
making  a  total  increase  of  $4.50  and  bringing 
the  scale  up  to  the  present  figures — $34.50  lor 
day  work  and  $37.50  for  night  work. 

We  call  to  the  attention  of  the  arbitrator  the 
fact  that  in  this  very  recent  arbitration  the  Judge 
had  before  him  all  of  the  problems  in  the  cost 
of  living  which  it  was  possible  to  advance  and 
all  that  could  be  set  up  today  in  the  same  c.ise, 
and  he  had  confronting  him  the  problem  of  the 
continuation  of  the  war  which  does  not  con- 
front the  arbitrator  in  the  present  instance,  and 
he  had  before  him  the  possibility  of  a  constantly 
increasing  cost  of  living  due  to  the  war  which 
has  been  converted  into  a  probability  ot  a 
steadily  decreasing  cost  of  living  m  view  of  the 
ending  of  the  war.  This  is  the  situation  that 
confronts  the  Judge  in  the  present  proceedings. 
The  previous  arbitrator  consKUrcd  the  wage 
scale  he  established  at  $34.50  for  the  day  work 
and  $37.50  for  night  work  sulTicient  to  meet 
the  problems  of  the  cost  of  living  then  presented 
by    the    Typographical    Union. 

Without  intending  in  any  way  to  impose  upon 
the  present  Judge  the  views  of  the  arbitrator  in 
the  previous  case,  we  submit  his  argument  and 
decision  for  consideration  in  the  adjudication 
to  be  made  in  the  present  case.  In  order  to 
present  evidence  that  the  wage  paid  by  the  New 
York  Publishers  to  members  of  the  Typograph- 
ical Union  is  a  fair  wage  that  compares  most  fa- 
vorably with  wages  paid  printers'  craft  in  news- 
papers all  over  the  country,  the  Publishers  sub- 
mit the  followinij  data  taken  from  the  American 
Newspaper  Publishers'  Association  Bulletin  No. 
1726,  dated  January  25,  1919,  entitled  'Com- 
parison  of  Typographical   Scales,"  the  entire  bul- 


15 


Ictin   being   submitted   as   an    exhibit   in   addition 
hereto. . 

Scale 

,, * \  Working 

City  Day  Night  Hours 

Albany $28.60  $31.90  48~~ 

Atlanta    27.50  30.30  48 

Boston    28.56  30.24  42 

Buffalo    28.50  30.50  48 

Chicago  31.00  33.00  45 

Cleveland    33.00  36.00  48 

Jersey    City    31.00  34.00  46 

Los  Angeles   30.00  33.00  45" 

Mr.  PouvcHEK — In  Los  AnRcles  I  am  informed 
that  by  .igreement  the  Publishers  got  together 
and    raised'   that    to    thirty-four    and    thirty-seven. 

Mr.  RovsE — Wouldn't  it  be  well  since  you 
\yant  notations  on  the  record  to  get  the  correct 
figures    for   Boston   and   Chicago? 

Mr.  PoLACHEK — T  had  nothing  later  to  work 
on  than  the  January  25,  1919,  Bulletin  of  the 
American    Newspaper    Publishers'   Association. 

Mr.  Oppenheimer — I  object  to  putting  into 
the  record  anything  that  Mr.  Polachek  has  been 
informed  about,  unless  he  can  furnish  evidence; 
that  is   hearsay   evidence. 

Mr.    Wardmax — It    is    in    your    favor. 

Mr.  Poi-ACHEK — I  merely  state  that  that  is  the 
understanding  that  I  have,  that  it  has  been  in- 
creased   above    that. 

Mr.  Wiley — He  merely  wants  to  be  fair 
about   it. 

Mr;    Wardman — It    is    in    your    favor. 

Mr.  Oppenheimer — It  does  not  matter  whether 
it  is  or  not;  I  object  to  it  going  into  the  record 
unless   it   is   proved   by   evidence. 

Mr.  Wiley — It  is  very  obvious  that  Mr.  Pola- 
chek's  information  is  accurate  because  Mr. 
Hearst    has    a    newspaper    in    Los   Angeles. 

Mr.  Polachek — That  is  the  source  from  which 
I    got    the    information. 

Mr.  Morrison — You  have  entered  an  objec- 
tion to  its  being  considered? 

Mr.  Oppenheimer — Yes,  I  have.  It  is  hear- 
say evidence.  We  have  the  data  right  here. 
We  have  the  correct  figures. 

Mr.  Wilev — Do  they  correspond  with  that 
statement? 

Mr.    Oppenheimer — No. 

Mr.  Morrison — We  will  allow  it  to  rest  there 
as   an   objection   on   the   record. 

Mr.  Wiley — Does  the  record  there  correspond 
with   his   statement? 

Mr.   Rouse — It  does  not. 

Mr.  Polachek — I  will  continue  reading  the 
table. 

Scale 

f '' ^  Working 

City Day Night  Hours 

Milwaukee     $27.00  $30.00  48 

Minneapolis    30.00  33.00  48 

Nashville     30.00  33.00  48 

Newark,  N.  J 33.00  36.00  46 

New   Haven,   Ct...  24.00  27.00  48 

New   York   34.50  37.50  45 

Omaha    31.50  34.50  48 

Paterson,    N.    J 24.00  27.00  48 

Philadelphia     32.00  35.00  45 

Pittsburg    30.09  32.34  45 

Portland,  Me 25.00  29.00  48 

Portland,   Ore.    ...  32.70  35.70  46 

Providence     32.00  34.00  48 

St.  Louis   31.50  35.00  46 

Salt  Lake  34.50  37.50  48 

San    Francisco    ...  34.00  37.00  45 

Mr.  Polachek — The  Los  Angeles  scale,  I  will 
again  state,  I  have  been  informed  from  our 
office  in  Los  Angeles  has  been  made  the  same 
as    San    Francisco,    thirty-four    and    thirty-seven. 

Mr.  Oppenheimer — I  make  the  same  objec- 
tion to  its  going   in   the   record. 


Mr.  Morrison — The  statement  has  been  made 
and  the  objection  is  tliere  and  we  will  allow  it 
to    rest   that    way    in    the    record. 

Mr.  Rouse — Have  you  any  further  informa- 
tion on   Seattle? 

Mr.  Polachek — No,  I  have  no  further  in- 
formation on  Seattle  except  that  in  the  Bulletin. 

Scale 

, '^ ^  Working 

City  Day  Night  Hours 

Seattle     33.00  36.00  42* 

Tacoma   33.00  36.30  42 

Washington    33.00  36.00  47 

Worcester,     Mass..  26.50  26.50  48 

Montreal     26.00  28.50  45+ 

Toronto    26.50  28.50  45 

Vancouver,   B.    C.  34.50  37.95  45 

Victoria,  B.   C 30.00  32.00  45 

■f  War    bonus    of    6    per    cent. 
*  Some   papers   paying    war   bonuses   above   this 
rate. 

Mr.  Polachek — There  has  a  war  bonus  been 
added  of  6  per  cent,  in  Montreal,  according  to 
our  records.  I  submit  the  Publishers'  Associa- 
tion   Bulletin   as    Publishers'    Exhibit   A. 

Mr.  Rouse — For  the  sake  of  the  proceedings, 
these  are  the  only  ones  you  are  concerned  in? 
(Indicating   table   above   read.) 

Mr.  Polachek — No,  I  submit  the  entire  Bul- 
letin, because  I  want  the  Arbitrator  to  consider 
the  scales  all  over  the  United  States,_  the  Union 
contract  scales  as  shown  by  our  official  Bulletin, 
but  for  the  purposes  of  my  brief  I  have  merely 
culled   out  a   few   examples. 

"  The  previous  arbitration  decision  was 
based  on  another  premise  which  Mr.  Mitchell, 
the  arbitrator,  stated  as  follows:  'The  ques- 
tion then  presents  itself:  Are  the  Publishers 
receiving  returns  sufficient  to  enable  them 
to  pay  higher  wages  to  the  members  of  the 
Printers'  Union?  '  The  evidence  proves  con- 
clusively that  the  net  returns  from  news- 
papers sold  are  150  per  cent,  greater  than 
were  the  net  returns  from  such  sales  when 
newspapers  sold  at  1  cent  per  copy.  It  is 
also  agreed  that  there  has  been  an  increase 
in  the  rates  for  general  advertising,  al- 
though it  is  claimed  AND  PROVED  that 
there  has  been  a  considerable  falling  off 
in  volume  of  such  advertising." 

In  presenting  their  case  to  the  arbitrator,  Mr. 
Mitchell,  the  Publishers  presented  to  the  arbi- 
trator some  facts  concerning  the  increased  ex- 
penses in  their  business.  At  that  time  the  Pub- 
lishers said:  ''Two  years  ago  the  price  of  news- 
print paper  was  $2  per  hundred  pounds  deliv- 
ered at  the  press  room.  Today  the  price  fixed 
by  the  United  States  Government  is  $3.10  per 
hundred  pounds  at  the  mill  with  an  average 
freight  rate  of  25  cents  per  hundred  pounds 
and  an  average  city  hauling  cost  of  7^  cents  per 
hundred    pounds. 

The  Publishers  of  New  York  use  approxi- 
mately 250,000  tons  of  newsprint  paper  per  year. 
In  this  item,  therefore,  they  suffer  an  added 
burden  of  $28.50  per  ton  or  a  total  of  $7,125,000 
per  year.  The  net  total  of  revenue  derived  from 
this  increased  price  amounted  to  less  than 
$4,700,000.  This  leaves  an  annual  deficit  on  the 
item  of  newsprint  paper  amounting  to  more 
than    $2,425,000. 

The  increased  selling  price  of  the  newspapers 
did  not  bring  to  the  Publishers  within  $2,425,000 
enough  additional  revenue  to  meet  the  increased 
cost  of  their  white  paper  alone. 

Since  that  evidence  was  presented  to  the  Judge 
in  the  previous  case,  the  Government  has  re- 
vised its  figures  for  newsprint  prices  and  the 
present  Government  price  on  which  contracts 
are  based  is  $3.75i  per  hundred  pounds,  which 
is  an  increase  of  65i  cents  per  hundred  pounds, 
or  $13.50  per  ton.  This  represents  a  further 
increase  in  newsprint  paper  cost  to  the  Publish- 
ers of  New  York  of  $3,375,000  per  year  and  there 
has  been  no  increase  in  the  selling  price  of 
newspapers  since  this  added  burden  was  put  on 
the    Publishers. 


16 


In  addition  to  these  burdens  the  Publishers 
have  had  to  meet  increased  prices  of  materials 
of  every  description  which' they  use  in  their 
plant  and  they  have  had  to  meet  wage  scale 
increases  in  all  departments  ranging  from  25 
per  cent,  to   75   per  cent. 

The  problem  in  the  present  case  thus  becomes 
one  of  the  ability  of  the  Publishers  to  pay.  It  is 
impossible  for  the  newspaper  business  on  the 
present  basis  of  selling  price  of  newspapers  to 
pay  a  wage  scale  such  as  has  been  put  before 
the  Arbitrator  by  the  Typographical   Union. 

Further,  the  Publishers  desire  to  point  out  to 
the  Arbitrator  that  this  particular  wage  scale, 
the  typographical,  represents  the  largest  payroll 
item  in  newspaper  offices.  On  this  payroll  are 
the  highest  paid  men  as  well  as  the  largest  force 
numerically,  of  any  on  the  staff  of  the  news- 
paper, so  that  an  increase  in  this  scale  comes 
as  the  heaviest  possible  charge  on  the  Publish- 
ers'  labor   expense  bill." 

Mr.  PoLACHEK — I  will  digress  for  a  minute. 
Take  the  machinists  whom  the  War  Labor  Board 
awarded  a  scale  of  $43.20  per  week:  now  the 
machinists  in  our  office,  which  is  a  large  office, 
represent  six  men;  in  most  offices  it  represents 
one  to  two  men.  Take  the  photo-engraving  scale 
about  which  considerable  has  been  said  and  which 
the  War  Labor  Board  has  just  given  a  further 
increase,  the  number  of  men  on  that  payroll  in 
the  average  newspaper  office  does  not  amount  to 
more  than   a   dozen  men. 

Mr.   Rouse — How  many  does  the    World  have? 

Mr.  PoLACHEK — I  don't  know  how  many  they 
have.  Mr.  Gunnison,  how  many  photo-engravers 
have    you,    for    instance? 

Mr.  Gunnison — We  have  very  few  now. 

Mr.  PoLACHEK — Four  I  think  was  the  last  re- 
port you  had. 

Mr.  Gunnison — Yes. 

Mr.  Rouse — The  World  has  between' 30  and  40 
if  my   information    is   correct. 

Mr.  PoLACHEK — I  don't  believe  they  have  that 
many. 

Mr.   Rouse — How  many  have  you  got? 

Mr.  PoLACHEK — We  do  all  the  syndicate  work; 
we  have  a  lot  of  outside  work;  we  run  about  48 
men.  That  is  the  New  York  American  does  not 
run  any  but  they  have  an  outside  plant  at  which 
their  work  and  work  all  over  the  country  and 
for   other  newspapers   in    the   city. 

Mr.  Oppenheimer — The  same  as  your  composi- 
tors do,  they  do  work  for  all  over  the  -country 
on   your   syndicate   work. 

Mr.  PoLACHEK — The  mailers  represent  a  small 
force;  the  only  very  large  force  that  had  a  very 
heavy  increase  were  the  pressmen;  the  pressmen 
represent  numerically  in  the  large  newspaper 
offices  almost  as  large  a  force  as  the  compositors. 

Mr.  Rouse — And  they  have  already  received 
$8  a  week  from  the  Rev.  Charles  Stelzle;  they 
are  now  asking   for  a  further  increase. 

Mr.  Oppenheimer — They  jumped  from  $25  per 
week   to   $33   per   week. 

Mr.  Rouse — They  work  six  hours  at  night  and 
the  same  number  of  hours  we  do  in  the  day  time. 

Mr.  PoLACHEK — The  six  hours  a  night  I  do 
not  think  is  germane.  It  is  obvious  that  the  six 
hours  night  work  was  given  to  the  pressmen  be- 
cause the  morning  papers  go  to  press  early  and 
they  have  got  to  be  off  before  people  start  to 
their  work  and  it  has  got  to  be  distributed;  it 
is    not    possible    on    a    morning    newspaper   to    use 

Eressmen  more  than  six  hours.  There  is  no  use 
aving  them  around  for  eight  hours,  if  you  can 
do  the  work  as  most  papers  do,  in  three  and 
one-half   to    four    hours. 

Mr.  Rouse — I  want  to  again  call  to  the  Arbi- 
trator's attention  the  fact  that  Mr.  Polachek  has 
digressed  and  has  enumerated  these  instances, 
that  in  all  these  increases  they  were  conceded  to 
be  the  most  highly  skilled  in  their  own  business. 
It  is  conceded  by  the  Publishers  that  we  are  the 
premiers  in  ours,  but  in  all  this  period  we  have 
received  an  increase  of  only  9  cents  per  hour 
or  approximately  15  per  cent.  The  pressmen,  as 
he  has  stated,  have  already  received  34  per  cent.; 
they  are  numerically  on  the  same  basis  as  we  are 
anci  are  now  before  an  arbitrator  with  a  $9  de- 
mand, and   in   all   probability   will  get  the  $9. 


Mr.  Polachek — Of  course,  there  is  just  this  to 
be  said  about  the  Typographical  Union,  that  al- 
ways in  the  newspaper  business  so  far  as  my 
experience  goes,  and  that  runs  for  something  over 
20  years,  the  Typographical  LTnion  has  been  the 
most  highly  organized  of  any  of  the  unions  oper- 
ating in  newspaper  offices  and  as  Mr.  Rouse  very 
truly  says,  the  most  skilled  and  the  most  highly 
intelligent  force  of  men  that  are  employed  in 
newspaper    offices. 

Mr.  Rouse — And  don't  forget  the  "  premier," 
so   far   as   wages   is   concerned. 

Mr.  Polachek — We  admit  that  also  and  it  is 
quite  true  that  their  increase  has  not  been  in  as 
great  a  ratio  as  that  of  the  other  unions,  but  you 
see  the  other  unions  were  so  much  lower  down 
in  the  scale,  and  as  Mr.  Rouse  and  Mr.  Oppen- 
heimer have  said,  the  cost  of  living  went  up  very 
seriously  and  no  matter  whether  a  man  was  a 
highly  skilled  man  or  a  little  bit  less  skilled,  he 
still  had  to  live  and  his  family  had  to  live  and  we 
had  to  provide  for  that.  Now,  if  a  man  was 
earning  $33  he  didn't  need  as  big  an  increase 
as  a  man  who  was  earning  $17  and  $22  and  $26. 

Mr.   Oppenheimer — -May   I   interrupt   you? 

Mr.   Polachek — You  may  have  the  floor. 

Mr.  Oppenheimer — I  want  to  say  that  to  my 
mind  your  premises  are  wrong,  because  a  man 
that  has  had  $17  a  week  for  years  and  years  has 
lived  up  to  that  standard  of  living,  while  the 
printer  who  had  $30  a  week  during  the  time  that 
the  other  man  had  $17  a  week  had  established  a 
standard  of  living  so  much  higher  than  the  other 
man  that  in  order  to  keep  up  with  that 

Mr.  Polachek — I  don't  think  that  is  a  fair 
proposition. 

Mr.    Wardman — Let   me    interrupt 

Mr.  Polachek — I  want  to  say  this,  thVit  I  have 
not  received  anything  to  make  up  for  my  in- 
creased cost  of  living  or  for  the  heavy  war  taxes 
that  I  pay,  and  I  don't  think  I  am  entitled  to  it 
in  the  same  ratio  as  men  who  were  affected  to 
the  point  of  being  deprived  of  actual  necessities 
when   the   cost   of  living  went  up.  ' 

Mr.  Oppenheimer — I  agree  to  that  but  your 
vi'ages  are  so  much  higher  than  any  of  ours,  you 
people  own  houses  and  property,  you  people  are 
practically  wealthy  men  compared  to  us;  you 
don't  want  to  compare  your  salary  at  $25,000  a 
year  probably,  or  $10,000  a  year,  with  a  paltry 
$30  a  week  that  the  printer  has.  We  do  not 
pay  war  taxes. 

Mr.  Wardman — Forget  us  and  yourself.  Here 
is  the  very  essence  of  the  thing;  the  man  who 
is  on  a  wage  of  $14  or  $16  a  week  has  a  bigger 
proportion  of  his  wage  going  into  meat  and  bread 
than  any  of  us,  and  he  must  eat  as  much  meat 
and  broad  as  we  eat  and  we  probably  eat  less 
meat  and  bread  than  he  does.  Therefore  when 
his  meat  and  bread  go  up,  the  things  he  must 
have  to  keep  body  and  soul  together,  he  has  got 
to  have  and  that  takes  a  bigger  proportion  of  his 
income. 

Mr.  Wiley — The  point  Mr.  Oppenheimer  made 
as  to  the  difference  in  the  scale  of  living  in  the 
argument  made  by  these  great  industrial  mag- 
nates who  have  large  incomes  against  paying  an 
abnormal  income  tax;  they  say  they  and  their 
families  are  accustomed  to  a  certain  scale  of  liv- 
ing and  if  you  take  too  great  an  amount  from 
them  it  is  interfering  with  their  happiness.  The 
same  argument  was  made  by  Mr.  Op|)enheimcr 
in   the  case  of  men   getting   $17   a  week. 

Mr.  Rouse — That  does  not  meet  the  point  at 
all,  Mr.  Morrison;  it  is  begging  the  question. 
We  have  stated  and  specifically  pointed  out  that 
the  Publishers  have  agreed  and  they  have  agreed 
in  your  presence  just  two  minutes  ago,  that  we 
were  the  premiers  in  a  certain  period  of  this  pre- 
war period,  and  that  we  ought  to  be  the  pre- 
miers. That  we  are  the  most  highly  skilled: 
that  we  are  the  ultra  intelligent,  so  to  speak,  and 
whether  we  demonstrate  it  or  not  is  another 
question • 

Mr.  Wiley — In  your  work. 

Mr.  Rouse — But  they  concede  that.  Now, 
taking  that  as  the  viewpoint,  we  show  conclu- 
sively that  there  was  a  logical  differentiation 
existing  between  all  these  crafts.  For  instance, 
the  photo-engravers,  starting   in   1914  were  recciv- 


17 


ing  %29  per  week  for  day  work  for  the  same 
number  of  hours  that  we  worked.  VVc  were 
receiving  $oO  a  week;  we  were  getting  $1  a  week 
niure  than  the  photo-enijravers.  To-day  the 
photo-engraver  is  receiving  $j9  jht  week  for  day 
work,  working  the  same  number  of  hours  that 
we  do  and  we  are  receiving  $o4.50.  If  their 
argument  is  good  and  if  they  are  sincere  in  their 
statt-raents  to  you.  they  should  without  going 
before  an  arbitrator,  have  awarded  us  $40  per 
week  for  day  work,  according  to  their  own  state- 
ments to  you.     This   they   have   not  done. 

Again,  In  the  same  period  of  time,  the  photo- 
engravers  working  at  night;  while  we  were  re- 
ceiving $J2  per  week  or  $31  per  week,  they  were 
recei\mg  $30  per  week.  When  we  were  receiv- 
ing $32  they  were  receiving  $31.  Now  for 
night  work  they  receive  $42  per  week  and  our 
night  men  get  $37.50.  And  better  yet,  the 
photo-engravers  have  had  their  hours  reduced  by 
one-half  hour;  they  are  now  working  seven  hours 
actual  work  as  against  seven  and  one-half  per- 
formed by  the  printers.  They  now  work  42 
hours  a  week  where  they  formerly  worked  45 
hours  a  week.  We  have  not  only  lost  the  pre- 
miership in  so  far  as  money  is  concerned  but  we 
have  lost  it  in  so  far  as  hours  are  concerned. 
The  Publishers  just  a  moment  ago  conceded  that 
we  should  be  and  ought  to  be  the  highest  paid 
and  the  best  provided  for  in  the  composing  room. 
Why?  Because  we  are  the  keystone  in  the  mak- 
ing of  the  newspaper. 

Mr.   Wiley — I   didn't  hear  that  concession. 

Mr.  Wardman — We  do  not  question  that. 

Mr.  Wiley — We  do  not  question  that  at  all. 

Mr.  Rouse — If  their  statements  are  true,  then 
without  any  further  ado,  according  to  their  own 
admissions,  we  are  entitled  right  at  this  moment, 
not  by  arbitaration  proceedings  but  by  their  own 
statements,  to  $40  for  day  work  and  $43  for 
night  work. 

Mr.  PoLACHEK — We  are  protesting  and  com- 
batting this  award  of  the  NVar  Labor  Board;  we 
do  not  think  it  is  a  fair  award;  we  know 
it  is  not  a  fair  award  and  in  the  Publishers' 
Association  meeting  j-esterday  the  most  serious 
question  that  was  discussed  was  the  abrogation 
and  abandonment  of  photo-engraving  in  the 
newspaper  establishment  because  we  cannot 
afford  it  at  the  prices.  It  is  in  the  way  of  a 
verdict,  entirely  unwarranted  by  the  facts  and 
we  do  not  believe  it  was  a  verdict  and  we  are 
not  going  to  stand  it  because  we  are  going  to 
eliminate  photo-engraving  to  the  utmost  of  our 
possibility. 

Mr.  Rouse — Let  me  call  this  to  your  attention: 
I  don't  want  to  do  it  but  if  it  is  necessary,  I 
can  go  back  to  the  time  of  Bishop  Burgess  in 
1903;  I  can  go  back  to  the  time  in  1907 

Mr.  Wiley — I  hope  it  won't  be  necessary. 

Mr.  Rouse — When  Mr.  Wardman  was  counsel 
for  the  Publishers'  Association  and  when  Mr. 
Wardman  predicted  the  same  catyclism  of  calam- 
ity that  was  going  to  sweep  over  this  direat  met- 
ropolitan city  of  ours,  when  everybody  in  the 
newspaper  business  would  be  dead  and  buried 
over  in  Greenwood  Cemetery,  but  we  haven't 
seen  that.  The  only  instance  wc  have  seen  of 
that  is  the  amalgamation  of  the  New  York  Sun 
and  the  New  York  Press,  done  for  business 
reasons,  and  today  the  New  York  Evening  Sun 
and  the  New  York  Evening  Journal  are  the  two 
most  prosperous  evening  newspapers,  I  guess,  on 
the  American  continent.  And  the  Times,  that 
sprang  from  a  waning  leaflet.  I  would  like  to- 
day to  have  just  one  block  of  stock  in  that  paper 
and  I  shouldn't  want  to  work  for  the  rest  of 
my  life. 

Mr.  Wiley — If  the  scale  that  you  ask  is 
granted,  you  would  be  able  to  buy  all  our  prop- 
erty. 

Mr.  Rouse — All  these  calamity  cries  are  ex- 
traneous and  are  not  borne  out  by  the  facts. 

Mr.  Wardman — I  support  Mr.  Rouse's  conten- 
tion in  that,  that  these  obiter  dicta  have  nothing 
to  do  with  the  case;  let  us  stick  to  the  case. 

Mr.  Rouse — The  fact  remains  as  admitted  just 
now,  that  Mr.  Polachek  and  the  rest  of  them 
concede,  because  they  like  us  so  well,  that  we  are 
the  most  intelligent  and  most  competent  and  that 


we  should  be  the  premier  and  we  expect  you  to 
award   us  accordingly. 

Mr.  Polachek — I  will  continue  to  read  our 
brief: 

"  The  Publishers  are  not  opposing  the  demand 
of  the  Typographical  Union  on  any  ground  ex- 
cept that  it  IS  exorbitant  and  unwarranted 
either  by  business  conditions  confronting  the 
Publishers  or  by  the  necessities  confronting  the 
Typographical   Union  members. 

If  the  arbitrator  feels  that  the  members  of  the 
Typographical  Union  are  entitled  to  any  relief 
at  all  in  the  matter  of  wages,  the  Publishers 
would  ask  the  arbitrator  to  consider  the  neces- 
sity of  the  Publishers  and  give  them  some  relief 
in  working  conditions  which  might,  in  a  measure, 
mitigate  the  charge  against  the   Publishers. 

In  this  connection,  we  call  the  arbitrator's 
attention  to  the  request  of  the  Publishers'  Asso- 
ciation for  an  eight-hour  work  day.  The  eight- 
hour  day  is  a  fair  day's  work  and  it  is  commonly 
accepted  as  a  fair  day's  work.  It  has  been  the 
slogan  of  the  Typographical  Union  for  many 
years. 

The  local  branches  of  the  International  Typo- 
graphical Union  have  in  force  nearly  200  con- 
tracts in  nearly  200  different  cities  and  towns 
requiring  a  full  eight-hour  work  day.  In  almost 
all  branches  of  work  performed  by  the  Typo- 
graphical Union  except  newspaper  work,  the  48- 
hour  week  is  an  established  fact.  In  most  cities, 
even  in  the  newspaper  field,  the  work  day  is  an 
eight-hour  day,  but  in  a  number  of  cities,  includ- 
ing New  York,  this  work  day  has  been  cut  to 
seven  and  one-half  hours  by  including  a  lunch 
period  of  one-half  hour  in  the  eight  hours 
worked. 

The  Publishers  request  the  arbitrator  to  con- 
sider the  newspaper  business  as  entitled  to  the 
same  courtesy  as  is  any  other  branch  of  the 
printing  business  and  grant  the  Publishers  the 
eight-hour  day.  The  Publishers  would  like  the 
lunch  period  provided  for  as  not  part  of  the  time 
for  which  the   Publisher  pays. 

Then  there  is  another  matter  in  working  con- 
ditions and  hours  which  works  as  a  hardship  on 
the  Publishers  and  costs  him  heavily  and  that  is 
the  limitation  placed  by  the  Union  on  the  shift 
hours.  This  limitation  is  not  very  important  to 
the  Union  but  it  is  extremely  important  to  the 
Publisher. 

The  Publishers  need  greater  latitude  for  oper- 
ation for  their  day  forces  and  night  forces  in 
order  that  their  business  may  be  conducted 
efficiently  and  economically  regardless  of  the 
scale  of  wages  paid.  The  scale  and  working  con- 
dition contract  should  meet  the  needs  of  the 
Publishers  of  the  various  kinds  of  newspapers 
and  the  hours  of  work  should  be  sufficiently 
flexible  to  meet  the  variety  of  the  requirements 
of  the  business  of  each  of  these  Publishers. 

The  members  of  the  Publishers'  Association 
publish   the   following   kinds   of   newspapers: 

Morning   papers   with    Sunday   editions. 

Evening  papers  with  Sunday  morning 
editions. 

Evening  papers  with  Sunday  evening 
editions. 

Morning   papers   with   Sunday  editions. 

Evening  papers  with  Sunday  morning 
editions. 

Evening  papers  with  Sunday  evening 
editions. 

Morning  papers  without   Sunday  editions. 

Evening  papers  without  Sunday  editions  and 
in  the  evennig  field  some  newspapers  pub- 
lish many  editions  over  a  large  portion  of 
the  day  and  others  publish  fewer  editions 
concentrated    in    certain    parts    of   the    day. 

In  order  that  all  the  needs  of  all  the  pub- 
lishers of  all  kinds  of  newspaper  may  be  best 
served  the  Publishers  ask  that  day  work  shall  be 
defined  as  any  eight  hours  between  the  hours  of 
6  a.  m.  and  6  p.  m.  and  that  night  work  shall 
be  defined  as  any  eight  hours  between  6  p.  m. 
and  6  a.  m.  ^ 

The  Publishers  present  for  the  arbitrator  s 
consideration  the  fact  that  a  leeway  of  12  hours 
within  which  to  perform  day  work  and  12  hours 
within  which  to  perform  night  work  is  a  com- 
mon practice  recognized  in  many  Typographical 
Union  newspaper  contracts  and  in  practically 
all  book  and  job  printing  contracts. 


18 


Thirty-one  cities  in  which  the  Typographical 
Union  has  newspaper  contracts  operate  on  the 
tasis  of  two  eight-hour  shifts  around  the  clock 
with  twelve  hours  leeway  for  the  eight  hours' 
work  on  both  day  and  night  shifts.  In  these 
cities  the  day  hours  are  from  6  a.  m.  to  6  p.  m. 
and  the  night  hours  from  6  p.  m.  to  6  a.  m., 
exactly  as  requested  by  the  New  York  Pub- 
lishers. 

We  find  on  examination  of  the  records  that 
out  of  223  Typographical  Union  contracts  in  the 
United  States  and  Canada,  222  contracts  are 
better  as  to  the  shift  conditions  than  is  the 
New  York  contract.  Ninety-eight  contracts 
make  no  limitations  whatsoever  and  31  contracts 
provide  hours  exactly  similar  to  those  asked  by 
the   New   York   Publishers. 

The  Typographical  Union  has  made  a  demand 
for  double  time  for  overtime.  No  other  Union 
in  the  newspaper  publishing  business  (and  the 
Publishers  deal  with  approximately  twenty-one 
Unions)    has   made  such   a  request. 

The  Publishers  at  present  are  paying  time  and 
one-half  for  overtime  and  while  they  agree  with 
the  Typographical  Union  that  overtime  should  be 
discouraged,  they  think  that  the  present  penalty 
of  50  per  cent,  is  sufficient  to  effect  that  dis- 
couragement. 

The  Publishers  do  not  use  men  on  overtime 
except  when  conditions  make  it  imperative  and 
in  most  cases  overtime  is  due  to  the  fact  that  the 
shift  hours  of  the  contract  are  not  suited  to  the 
needs   of   the  newspaper  offices. 

Two  shifts  around  the  clock  with  an  opportu- 
nity to  phalanx  day  and  night  forces  would  enable 
the  Publishers  to  eliminate  most  of  the  overtime 
provided  the   Union   is  ready  to  supply  men. 

During  the  recent  war  period,  much  of  the 
overtime  was  caused  by  the  fact  that  there  was 
a  shortage  of  printers.  This  the  Union  has  it 
in  its  power  to  remedy  now  that  the  war  is  over. 
The  only  other  overtime  that  the  Publishers  have 
asked  of  the  men  is  Saturday  afternoon  work 
on  Sunday  morning  newspapers  when  forces  of 
men  are  brought  in  in  advance  of  the  regular 
night  working  schedule  in  order  to  meet  the 
requirements   of   large    Sunday   editions. 

And  such  a  volume  of  work  is  concentrated  on 
the  afternoon  and  night  of  publication  that  the 
newspaper  finds  it  necessary  to  bring  in  a  force 
of  men  anywhere  from  1  to  3  o'clock  in  the 
afternoon  to  take  the  crush  of  that  Sunday  work. 
Now  under  our  contract  overtime  is  work  per- 
formed either  before  or  after  the  regular  shift 
hours;     ergo,    you    have    a    force    coming    in    at 

1  o'clock;  that  force  starts  immediately  to  re- 
ceive pay  on  an  overtime  basis  until  6  o'clock 
at  night  when  it  goes  on  regular  time.  Now  the 
Publisher  might  not  need  his  men  for  the  full 
period    of    the    eight    hours    from    6    o'clock    until 

2  the  next  morning,  but  they  have  got  to  put  in 
a  day's  work  because  that  is  their  regular  shift 
hour,  6  to  2;  having  come  on  at  1  o'clock,  they 
have  got  5  hours  of  overtime  for  which  they 
must  be  paid  overtime  rates.  We  do  not  force 
that  condition.  It  is  the  working  conditions  of 
the  contract  that  forces  it.  Now  these  men 
representing  Typographical  Union  No.  6  come  to 
us  as  a  representative  body  to  another  representa- 
tive body  representing  16  or  18  or  20  newspapers, 
and  say,  "  We  will  contract  with  you  to  do 
the  work  required  in  your  offices."  Our  con- 
tention is  that  the  work  required"  in  our  office 
is  normal,  provided  it  is  done  in  the  course  ofc 
the  prdouction  of  the  usual  editions  of  the  news- 
paper, and  this  Union,  if  it  wants  to  make  a 
collective  bargain  with  a  collective  band  of  Pub- 
lishers, must  prepare  and  be  ready  to  sign  a 
contract  which  meets  the  requirements  of  those 
Publishers.  Mr.  Gunnison,  representing  the 
Brooklyn  Eagle,  has  a  six-day  afternoon  and 
Sunday  morning  newspaper.  I  don't  know  how 
many  years  he  has  had  it,  but  I  think  he  had  it 
before   I    was  born. 

Mr.  Gunnison — Seventy-six  years. 

Mr.  PnLACHEK — And  before  a  number  of  other 
gentlemen  here  were  born.  This  Union  knows 
that  this  man  and  several  other  papers  like  that 
which  he  represents,  are  members  of  this  organ- 
ization and  when  they  come  in  to  make  a  con- 
tract with  us  to  do  the  work  of  that  organization 
— six  afternoon  editions  and  one  Sunday  edition, 
being   the   normal   production   of  that  plant,   that 


has  got  to  be  met  and  they  come  in  with  a  prop- 
osition to  make  a  contract  to  meet  it.  Now  they 
cannot  come  in  and  say,  "  Well,  you  are  asking 
unusual  things  of  us,  Mr.  Gunnison,  you  are 
saying  that  men  must  work  all  day  Saturday  and 
Saturday  night."  It  is  their  duty  to  get  to- 
gether with  the  publisher  and  frame  the  kind  of 
a  contract  which  will  permit  the  men  to  have  his 
working  hours  and  still  perform  the  work  that 
that  paper  requires  in  order  that  it  may  be 
produced. 

Mr.   Rouse — Which  we   have  done. 

Mr.  PoLACHEK — You  are  making  a  plea  that 
the  requirements  of  the  Brooklyn  paper  imposes 
an  unreasonable,  unusual,  terrifically  heavy 
strain  on  an  individual.  That  is  not  the  point 
that  it  is  a  strain  on  an  individual.  Mr.  Gun- 
nison's property  has  really  a  seven  day  opera- 
tion, six  days  and  one  night.  The  men  are 
only  supposed  to  work  six  days.  Now  if 
proper  hours  are  arranged  to  meet  his  condi- 
tions, he  can  have  a  seven  day  force  there, 
phalanxing  his  men  and  there  is  no  need  of 
men  working  Saturday  afternoon  and  Saturday 
night. 

Mr.  Rouse — Yes,  there  is. 

Mr.  PoLACHEK — Now  I  remember  when  I 
was  in  Chicago 

Mr.  Oppenheimer — We  will  be  glad  to  have 
you  fix  a  scale  that  will  arrange  that  for  us. 

Mr.  Polachek — In  a  very  large  measure  it 
can   be   adjusted,   I   am   sure. 

Mr.  Wardman — Here  is  a  much  simpler  ob- 
ject lesson;  we  are  all  so  familiar  with  the 
technicalities  but  I  assume  the  arbitrator  is  not: 
now  you  take  an  ordinary  newspaper  going  to 
press  Saturday  for  Sunday  morning,  the  Gov- 
ernment comes  along,  your  mails  have  been 
running  all  the  way  from  12:30  to  4  in  the 
morning — this  scale  years  and  years  ago  and 
these  hours  years  and  years  ago  were  made  on 
that  basis  before  any  of  us  were  in  business — 
the  Government  comes  along  and  pushes  the 
mails  back  an  hour,  that  means  that  you  have 
got  to  go  to  work  a  little  earlier;  the  Govern- 
ment comes  along  and  pushes  the  hours  still  an- 
other hour  earlier  and  it  means  that  you  have 
got  to  go  to  press  at  10  o'clock  at  night — 
some  of  these  papers  have — to  catch  the  mails, 
but  the  men  are  pushed  back  from  6  o'clock 
where  they  might  be  ordinarily  called  on  and 
start  to  run  at  S  some  of  them  and  4  some  of 
them  to  3,  because  they  begin  earlier,  not  be- 
cause they  work  longer  but  because  they  begin 
overtime,  there  is  an  overtime  charge  on  com- 
ing to  work  an  hour  earlier  or  two  hours  earlier. 
It  is  simply  the  A.  B.  C.  of  it.  It  is  not  their 
fault. 

Mr.  Morrison — That  refers  entirely  to  the 
Sunday   papers? 

Mr.  Wardman — Yes,  it  is  not  their  fault,  it 
is   the   Government's   fault. 

Mr.  Rouse— I  wish  to  call  to  the  attention 
of  the  arbitrator  this  fact,  that  Mr.  Polachek 
and  Mr.  Gunnison  are  making  an  argument  be- 
fore the  arbitrator  aside  from  the  issues.  They 
are  speaking  about  men  being  called  in  earlier 
on  Saturday,  1,  2  and  3  o'clock;  that  is  not  be- 
fore  the   arbitrator. 

Mr.  Polachek — Pardon  me,  it  is  before  the 
arbitrator   in   the  matter   of   overtime   charges. 

Mr.  Morrison — I  thought  we  were  discussing 
overtime. 

Mr.  Poi-ACHEK — We  are,  and  that  is  the 
largest  element  of  overtime  in  any  of  our  news- 
paper offices;  the  only  other  element  of  over- 
time that  enters  into  our  work  is  the  Friday 
and  Thursday  night  rush  of  advertising,  which 
is  also  advertising  for  the  Sunday  papers.  And 
on  those  nights  the  Union  has,  because  of  the 
big  demand  for  its  members,  been  unable  to 
supply  as  many  men  as  are  required  and  my 
foreman  reports  to  me  that  every  Thursday 
and  Friday  night  he  finds  himself  short  of  the 
number  of'^  men  that  he  requires  to  do  his  work 
and   as   a   result    overtime    follows. 

Mr.  Morrison — Did  I  understand  Mr.  Rouse 
and  Mr.  Oppenheimer  tn  say  that  if  a  plan 
could  be  arranged  to  eliminate  overtime  they 
would    be   glad   to   meet   it? 


Mr.  Oppfmieimer — We  certainly  wouUl,  if 
they    could   arraiiKC    .1    plan. 

Mr.  Roi'SE — Let  nil-  explain,  so  that  you  will 
have  this  fact  clear;  \vc  can  prove  beyond  the 
shadow  of  a  doubt  that  the  reason  for  the  cx- 
cr»5ive  overtime  bcinn  worked  at  present  is  be- 
cause of  the  unusual  prosperity  of  all  the  papers 
in  New  Yi'rk  City.  \Ve  can  prove  conclusively 
to  the  arbitrator's  mind  and  to  the  Publishers 
as  well,  that  in  New  York  City  to-day  there 
are  over  JOO  more  men  workinj;  in  the  news- 
paper industry  in  this  city  than  there  were 
when  they  appeared  with  us  in  the  former  arbi- 
tration proceedinvts.  Kven  deducting  the  two 
additional  papers  that  have  been  unionized  since 
that  time,  the  New  York  Ezfiiiiig  Post  and  the 
New  York  Comif.crcial.  there  are  over  200  more 
men  working  on  the  newspapers  to-day,  while 
this  excessive   overtime   is  being  worked. 

Mr.  Gunnison— But  that  would  be  on  in  the 
rebuttal,   wouldn't   it? 

Mr.  RorsE — Well,  if  you  are  going  to  digress, 
let  us  have  it.  There  is  a  sample  of  the  over- 
time list  posted  in  the  New  York  World  for 
this  week  (indicating  paper),  there  are  100 
names  on  it  for  overtime  work  in  spite  of  the 
fact  that  there  are  over  200  men  working  in 
the  newspaper  offices  to-day  that  weren't  work- 
ing there  nine  months  ago. 

Mr.  PoLACHEK — Mr.  Wiley  and  myself,  right 
in  this  very  room  last  week,  agreed  to  put  on 
more  men  on  overtime  on  Saturday  in  order  to 
get  the  classified  advertising  out  of  the  way 
because    he    complained 

Mr.  Rouse — I  can  give  it  to  you  from  day 
to  day  but  I  don't  want  to  encumber  the  record 
with   It. 

Mr.  Pol.^chek — I  think  it  ought  to  be  en- 
cumbered  on   an    important   matter   like   this. 

Mr.  Rouse — That  is  just  a  sample  of  the 
number  of  men  that  are  posted  this  week  in 
the  New   Y'ork   World  office.      (Indicating  paper.) 

Mr.  Morrison — I  believe  I  would  like  to 
have  some  understanding  or  statement  from  the 
Publishers  or  the  Union — probably  the  Pub- 
lishers would  be  able  to  give  it  because  they 
have  the  records — of  the  amount  of  overtime 
work  on  the  Sunday  papers. 

Mr.  Wardman — The  other  side  could  give  it; 
it   is  very   simple. 

Mr.  Morrison — And  the  number  of  hours 
worked  each  day.  whether  it  runs  2  hours  a  day 
or   4   hours   a   day. 

Mr.  PoLACHEK — Our  overtime  in  our  oflfice — 
I  speak  for  the  New  York  American  and  the 
New  York  Journal — -our  overtime  on  any  day 
except  Saturday  afternoon  and  on  Thursday 
night  and  Friday  night  is  practically  nothing. 
Thiirsday  night  and  Friday  night  the  overtime 
is  invariably  due  to  the  inability  to  get  men 
required  to  set  the  advertising  and  Saturday 
our  overtime  is  entirely  due  to  the  necessity  of 
bringing  men  down  early  in  the  afternoon, 
which  IS  out  of  the  regular  working  hours  and 
therefore  charged   us  as  overtime. 

Mr.  Morrison — For  the  purpose  of  meeting 
the  mail,  getting  the  paper  out  in  time  for  the 
mail. 

Mr.   Polachek — Exactly. 

Mr.  Morrison' — How  many  hours  overtime  is 
worked    usually   on    Saturday? 

Mr.  Polachek — I  cannot  give  you  the  exact 
figures;  I  can  have  that  information  drawn  from 
our   payrolls. 

Mr.  Rouse — Mr.  Morrison,  it  could  not  run 
beyond  three  hours  on  Saturday  afternoon  be- 
cause the  quitting  time  would  be  3  o'clock  and 
12  hours  must  intervene.  They  could  not  work 
any  longer  than  3  hours  because  they  have  got 
to  have  an  intervening  time  of  12  hours  be- 
tween their  quitting  time  and  their  going  to 
work.  They  start  the  men  at  7  and  they  quit  at 
3  and  they  go  back  at  3  Saturday  afternoon. 
They  do  not  call  all  of  them  back;  they  call 
only   the    machine    operators. 

Mr.  Polachek — That  is  where  our  overtime 
bill    originates. 

Mr.  Rouse — The  World  is  the  same  sort  of 
a  paper,  in  fact  it  has  the  largest  composing 
room    in   the   city.     The    World   had   almost   com- 


pletely eliminated  overtime  in  the  past  until  this 
unprecedented  era  of  prosperity  has  struck  New 
York  in  all  of  the  newspapers  and  it  is  now 
because  of  this  unprecedented  prosperity  that 
they  are  compelled  to  work  overtime. 

Mr.  Wardman — And  the  Government  back- 
ing the   mails  up. 

Mr.  Rouse — Mr.  Keller  is  the  copy  cutter  of 
the  Ne-u)  York  Sun.  Mr.  Keller,  do  they  work 
overtime  in  your  office  only  on  the  one  day,  Sat- 
urtlay,  or  do  they  work  overtime  there  more  than 
Saturday? 

Mr.  Keller — No,  we  work  overtime  every 
morning  in  the  week.  We  work  7  days,  an  hour 
each  day  with  the  exception  of  one,  which  is  a 
half    hour. 

Mr.  Morrison — On  Saturday  how  many  hours 
do   you   work   overtime?  ^ 

Mr.   Keller — One   hour. 

Mr.  Morrison — Do  you  mean  to  say  that  you 
do   not   work   more   than   one   hour   each   day? 

Mr.  Keller — No,  I  work  one  hour  overtime 
on    Saturday;   that   is  about  the  time. 

Mr.    Rouse — He   is   the   copy   cutter. 

Mr.  Morrison — Then  on  the  paper  in  Brook- 
lyn   is    there    overtime    there? 

Mr.  Rouse — Very  little;  the  Brooklyn  situa- 
tion  is  different. 

Mr.  Polachek — Yes,  the  Brooklyn  situation  is 
different. 

Mr.  Morrison — I  want  to  know  if  the  over- 
time could  be  confined,  within  2  hours  would 
it  be  confined  within   2   hours  on   Saturday. 

Mr.  Gunnison — Not  at  this  time  of  the  year. 

Mr.  Polachek — For  instance  in  our  office, 
the  Saturday  force  coming  on  for  the  Sunday 
paper,  comes  on  in  our  office  at  3  o'clock  in 
the  afternoon.  That  means  that  they  would 
have  3  hours  of  overtime  before  the  regular 
starting  hour.  In  the  Times  I  believe  they  come 
still   earlier. 

Mr.   O'Donnell — Yes. 

Mr.  Polachek — We  have  two  papers  in  our 
office,  an  evening  paper  and  a  morning  paper, 
therefore  'there  is  an  evening  paper  force  avail- 
able to  do  as  much  work  as  it  can  do  up  to  3 
o'clock  in  the  afternoon,  but  the  Times,  which 
is  a  morning  paper  and  Sunday  paper  alone, 
has  no  day  force  at  work  on  Saturday.  Its 
work  must  be  started  I  presume  around  1  or  2 
o'clock  in  the  afternoon.  That  means  S  hours 
of  overtime  that  the  Times'  force  has  because 
they  must  have  the  men  there.  The  Times 
has  a  big  newspaper  plant  and  a  great  deal  of 
advertising  and  a  great  deal  of  news  matter; 
it  must  be  gotten  out,  mails  must  be  met  and 
the  force  must  be  made  to  work  Saturday  after- 
noon. 

Mr.  Morrison — That  gives  the  men  how 
many   hours   that   day   to    work? 

Mr.  O'DoNNELL — The  regular  time  plus  the 
extra. 

Mr.    Morrison — It   vvould   be    7i   plus    5. 

Mr.    PoLACHECK — Yes. 

Mr.  Rouse — I  have  a  statement  here  of  the 
number  of  hours:  the  American  has  worked 
2,045  hours,  that  is  not  including  the  past  week. 
The  City  Record  has  worked  20  hours,  the 
Courier   12,  the    Wall  Street  Journal   216. 

Mr.  Polachek — That  is  not  information,  Mr. 
Rouse;  tell  us  the  number  of  hours  per  day 
per  man. 

Mr.  Morrison — I  want  the  number  of  hours 
they  work  each  day,  whether  it  is  one  hour  or 
two,  or  three,  or  four. 

Mr.   Rouse — It  fluctuates. 

Mr.  Oppenheimer — I  want  to  call  the  atten- 
tion of  the  arbitrator  to  the  fact  that  they  can 
work  only  a  certain  number  of  hours*  each  day. 
We  have  a  law  in  the  Union  which  stipulates 
that  12  hours  must  intervene  between  one  shift 
and  another.  Now  you  take  12  hours  from  24 
and  it  shows  you  that  they  have  only  12  hours 
to  work  in.  The  most  they  could  possibly  work 
in  any  one  day  is  4  hours  overtime.  Now  they 
do  not  work  that  time. 


20 


Mr.  Morrison — On  the  question  of  the 
Times,  they   worked   twelve   hours  that   day? 

Mr.  PoLACHEK — The  Times  would  be  pretty 
near  in  shape  to  put  on  two  shifts  if  they 
could   get   them. 

Mr.  O'DoNNELL — But  they  could  not  get 
them. 

Mr.  Oppenheimer — I  wish  to  call  the  atten- 
tion of  the  arbitrator  to  the  fact  that  the  same 
gentleman,  Mr.  O'Donnell  in  the  last  proceedings 
made  the  same  statement  to  Mr.  Mitchell.  He 
said,  "We  cannot  get  the  men,"  and  the  fol- 
lowing week  they  laid  off  men  in  the  Times 
office. 

Mr.  O'Donnell — That  is  possible  the  follow- 
ing week,  yes. 

Mr.  Rouse — And  our  records  show  that  they 
have  more  extra  men  showing  up  in  the  Times 
otTice  than  in  any  newspaper  office  in  New 
York   City. 

Mr.    O'Donnell — We  have  to   have   them. 

Mr.   Rouse — More   extra  men. 

Mr.  O'Donnell — That  is  true;  we  have  to 
have  them,   and   we  engage  more  extra  men. 

Mr.  Wardm.'^n — I  am  in  thorough  sympathy 
with  Mr.  Rouse  and  all  his  associates;  and,  so 
far  as  I  know,  all  the  others  are.  I  am  as  great 
an  enemy  of  overtime  as  anyone,  not  that  I  have 
to  pay  a  greater  amount,  because  I  don't,  but 
because  I  think  it  is  a  vicious  thing,  and  I 
would  like  to  eliminate  every  bit  of  it;  if  the 
business  permitted  it — and  we  pretty  nearly  do 
eliminate  it  in  our  office — but  if  they  force 
you  before  that  dead  line,  those  papers  that  are 
sufferers,  there  is  no  escape  from  this  overtime, 
because  it  is  beyond  the  power  of  the  Union  and 
it  is  beyond  the  power  of  the  paper  owners  unless 
you    make    that    eight    hours    more    flexible. 

Mr.  Rouse — I  say  again,  Mr.  Morrison,  as  I 
said  to  Mr.  Mitchell,  and  it  is  irrefutable  and 
cannot  be  denied  by  the  Times  management,  that 
they  have  had  more  men  showing  up  in  the 
Times  office  than  in  any  other  of  the  metro- 
politan    papers. 

Mr.  Wardman — That  does  not  answer  the 
paint. 

Mr.  Rouse — Let  me  finish.  I  say  further  that 
the  Times  is  increasing  so  fast  and  so  rapidly 
that  they  cannot  count  the  dollars  up  there,  they 
are  coming  so  fast  into  their  coffers.  They  are 
turning  away  advertisers  because  they  have  no 
room  to  print  their  advertisements. 

Mr.  O'Donnell — That  is  because  they  limit 
the    size    of    the    paper. 

Mr.  Rouse — It  is  the  same  in  the  other 
papers;  here  we  have  the  World,  which  had 
almost  eliminated  overtime  from  its  composing 
room — almost  entirely  eliminated  it — Mr.  Scitz 
so  stated,  until  the  present  year  of  prosperity 
came  in.  What  do  we  see?  We  see  to-day  in 
New  York  City  the  Evening  World,  on  three 
days  a  week  and  sometimes  four,  publishing 
a  32-page  evening  paper.  Why?  Because  they 
have  got  so  much  advertising.  It  is  common 
knowledge  that  before  long  the  morning  paper  is 
going  to  be  32  pages,  which  will  be  something 
unprecedented  for  the  World.  Now  all  these 
papers  are  increasing  their  size.  Prosperity  is 
what   is  doing  it. 

Mr.  Wardman — What  has  that  got  to  do  with 
the  argument?  There  is  another  side  to  it  that 
we  have  already  considered  and  that  you  will 
take  up  no  doubt  in  the  rebuttal,  that  if  a  paper 
has  to  go  to  press  at  5  o'clock  because  of  this 
golden  prosperity  that  shines  on  some,  as  you 
expressed   it,   or   because 

Mr.   Rouse— It  is   shining  on   all. 

Mr.  Wardman — Or  because  of  the  United 
States  Government,  that  has  ruined  our  mail 
service,  if  it  has  to  go  to  press  at  five  and  we 
want  to  eliminate  overtime,  why  dt)n't  you  let 
them  go  to  five  and  knock  ofT  after  eight  hours? 

Mr.  Oppenheimer — Because  a  man  could  not 
live   and   work   the   hours   you   propose. 

Mr.  Wardman — I  have  no  doubt  you  will 
bring     that     side     of     it     out     later. 


Mr.  Oppenheimer — We  brought  it  out  at  th^ 
last  arbitration  proceeding,  and  Mr.  Morrison 
will  see  a  copy  of  it.  He  will  have  our  whole 
argument. 

Mr.  Rouse — The  point  the  Union  makes  to 
the  Arbitrator  is"  simply  this,  that  everybody 
knows  when  the  newspaper  printer  starts  to  work 
from  the  tolling  of  the  bell  his  work  requires 
the  closest  application  that  a  man  can  give;  it 
is  concentration  of  mind  and  body  and  every- 
thing combined'  for  the  full  seven  and  a  half 
hours  that  he  works.  Now,  if  in  addition  to 
that  he  is  called  upon  to  put  in  four  hours 
more   overtime 

Mr.  Wardman — But  that  is  not  the  idea. 

Mr.  Rouse — If  in  addition  to  that  he  is  called 
back  after  completing  this  strenuous  night's  work, 
to  an  early  time  in  the  afternoon,  then  there 
should  be  some  extra  compensation  for  that. 
Why?  Because,  as  the  employer  is  deriving  his 
revenue  in  increasd  profits,  so  should  the  man 
that  is  giving  his  life's  blood  derive  some  benefit 
from  that  extra  compensation  when  he  is  wear- 
ing  himself   out   physically. 

Mr.  Wardman — But  he  does  not.  You  do  not 
permit  him  to  derive  any  extra  compensation. 
He    has   to   take   time   off   another   time. 

Mr.  Rouse — He  has  to  take  the  time  off,  but 
he  does  derive  benefit  in  this  way,  that  if  there 
is  an  extra  price  put  on  this  overtime,  he  has 
to  take  the  time  off,  but  has  to  give  it  out  in 
hours  only.  If  there  is  an  extra  compensation 
for  the  overtime,  he  derives  the  benefit  of  the 
extra  money  in  addition  to  his  regular  time  that 
comes  to  him.  He  don't  give  it  out  in  muney, 
he  gives  it  out  in  hours,  and  the  hours  that  he 
gives  out  are  rated  at  the  single  price.  There- 
fore, he  does  derive  compensation  for  it  if  there 
is  a   penalty   put   on   this   excessive   strain. 

Mr.  Polachek — There  is  a  penalty  of  time 
and    a    half. 

Mr.    Rouse — And   it   should   be   double    price. 
Mr.     Gunnison — Could     I    say     a    word    about 
this    Brooklyn    situation?      I    would    like    to    say 
just  one  word,  though  I  would  not  like  to  have  it 
on  the   minutes. 

(Mr.    Gunnison's    statement    at    this    point 
was   not   taken    on   the    minutes.) 

Mr.  Gunnison — Now  I  say  this  for  the  record: 
In  Brooklyn  we  have  a  condition  that  does  not 
exist  in  any  other  part  of  the  city.  We  pub- 
lish no  morning  papers  except  on  Sunday.  We 
depend'  upon  the  Manhattan  papers  for  out 
reading  in  the  morning.  Now,  that  condition 
has  been  in  existence  for  over  seventy  years — 
the  condition  of  an  afternoon  paper,  usually  a 
one-edition  paper,  and  the  .Sunday  morning 
paper.  They  have  emphasized  the  great  hardship 
of  working  what  they  call  a  doul)lc-header,  that 
is  working  on  Saturday  afternoon  and  .Saturday 
night.  I  do  not  think  it  is  a  hardship.  We 
know  from  conditions  there  and  from  the  men 
themselves  that  the  concession  which  they  get 
of  one  day  off  during  the  week,  because  every- 
one that  works  Saturdays  takes  his  day  off 
during  the  week,  they  would  much  prefer  to 
have  that  day  off  and  work  the  double-header 
on  .Saturdays'.  It  is  not  a  hardship.  We  pay  the 
regular  scale  for  day  work,  ami  wc  pay  the 
regular  scale  for  night  work;  and  whatever  you 
decide    that    will    be    cheerfully    <lone. 

But  1  just  want  to  make  this  clear  to  you: 
they  have  asked  an  increase  of  what  wc  call  a 
bonus.  It  is  not  a  scale,  it  has  never  been  a 
scale,  but  it  is  a  bonus  of  a  dollar  and  a  quarter 
Saturday  night  when  the  men  work  Salunlay 
morning.  In  otiier  words,  in  order  to  have  the 
same  men  continually,  in  fact  it  has  been  difficult 
to  bring  in  a  new  force  Saturday  night,  they 
would  not  understand  the  office,  and  some  of 
the  a<lvertisemcnts  might  be  half  set  or  sonic- 
thing  of  that  kind,  it  is  more  dilTicult  on 
Saturday  night  to  furnish  the  men.  so  wc  have 
said  to  our  own  people,  and  I  say  that  wc  do 
this  only  in  the  case  of  the  Typographical  Union, 
wc  do  not  do  it  in  any  of  the  other  unions,  we 
have   said    to   them,    "If   you   will    work    Saturday 


21 


night   and    Saturday   afternoon,   we   will   pay   you 

•  dollar  ami  a  n'uartcr;  and  that  they  call  a 
bonus  and  doni  consider  it  a  scale.  They  have 
raised  it  to  a  di>llar  and  eighty-one.  Of  course 
the  dilTerencc  is  not  very  great,  hut  1  do  not 
think  that  that  ought  to  be  increased.  That  is 
the  situation.  The  men,  it  is  true,  only  take 
two  hours  between  the  two  shifts,  but  they 
would  much  prefer  to  taKe  the  two  hours  than  to 
go  hi'me  and  take  four  or  five  hours,  and  come 
back  and  work  until  three  or  four  o'clock  in  the 
morning,  because  now,  most  of  them  get  off 
at  twelve  o'clock  at  night  and  get  home;  but 
if  thev  had  to  work  their  full  seven  hours  and  go 

:iti>     Sunday     morning,     why     that     would     be     a 
rferent   thing.      It   is  not   a  hardship.      They   get 

•  '.e  full  scale.  They  very  much  prefer  to  take 
the  full  pay  during  "the  week  for  their  pleasure. 
We  feel  that  that  one  item  of  the  increase  on 
the    bonus   ought    not   to   be   changed. 

Mr.  Rouse — Now,  with  reference  to  the 
Brooklyn  proposition,  they  are  asking  in  their 
Agreed  Statement  of  Facts  to  increase  the  hours 
on  the  night  side  of  this  Brooklyn  paper;  they 
are  asking  to  increase  those  hours  to  seven, 
where  they  work  six  and  a  half,  if  my  memory 
serves  me  right.  Now,  imagine  a  man  coming 
to  work  in  Brooklyn  at  eight  o'clock  in  the 
morning  and  putting  in  seven  and  a  half  hours 
of  strenuous  work,  close  concentration,  quitting 
at  four  o'clock,  and  then  being  called  back  at 
six  to  put  in  another  strenuous  service  of  con- 
tinuous close  application  to  his  work.  We  con- 
tend, and  justly  so,  that  he  is  under  service  all 
of  this  time;  we  contend  that  his  time  is  not 
his  own;  that  his  time  does  not  belong  to  him, 
and  that  he  is  in  the  pay  of  the  employer  from 
eight  o'clock  in  the  morning  until  the  time  he 
quits  at  night,  because  he  can't  do  anything 
with  his  intervening  two  hours.  He  can  only 
go  out  and  get  something  to  eat  and  walk  around 
the  block  and  then  go  back  to  work.  Now,  all 
we  ask  for  those  two  hours  is  single  price,  what- 
ever the  award  is  (and  we  hope  it  will  be  nine 
dollars) ;  that  the  men  will  get  paid  for  the  time 
from  four  to  six,  single  time.  The  basis  for 
that  came  in  1912,  when  it  was  changed  from  a 
set  figure  to  a  low  figure,  when  the  rate  was 
62y2  cents  an  hour  and  it  was  doubled  up, 
making  the  $1.25;  and  we  ask  the  Arbitrator  to 
so  rule.  It  is  a  simple  matter,  it  is  true,  but 
before  the  previous  Arbitrator,  Mr.  Mitchell,  we 
had  a  similar  contention  there  on  machinists, 
where  they  would  not  pay  this  dollar  and 
twenty-five  cents  to  the  machinists  who  worked 
the  double  header,  and  through  a  misruling  of 
a  former  president  the  machinists  were  deprived 
of  this  dollar  and  twenty-five  cents  for  full  five 
years;  and  I  was  forced  in  the  last  proceeding  to 
inject  that  into  the  argument.  And  then  the 
Publishers  themselves,  aside  from  the  representa- 
tive from  Brooklyn,  who  then  was  Mr.  Martin, 
conceded  that  my  position  was  correct,  and  the 
Arbitrator  so  ruled,  that  the  machinists  should 
be  paid  this  $1.25;  and  in  support  of  that  I 
request  the  Arbitrator  to  so  rule  in  these  pro- 
ceedings, that  this  bonus  rate  should  be  con- 
tinuous time  from  eight  o'clock  in  the  morning 
until  six,  to  be  paid  the  two  hours'  time  they 
are  entitled  to. 

Xow,  the  incentive:  The  incentive  is  there 
for  this  reason,  and  Mr.  Gunnison  will  admit 
without  question  that  the  reason  they  want  that 
bonus  there  is  because  they  want  their  regular 
men  to  do  this  work,  the  men  that  are  accus- 
tomed to  do  the  work;  they  are  regulars.  If  a 
man  puts  on  a  sub  on  Saturday  and  works 
Saturday  night,  ie  does  not  get  this  bonus;  the 
office  picks  up  that  money — they  pick  up  this 
$1.25.  or  whatever  it  might  be.  If  you  were 
a  regular  on  the  Brooklyn  Eagle.  Mr.  Morrison, 
and  you  put  a  sub  on  m  the  daytime  on  Satur- 
day, and  then  you  came  back  and  released  your 
sub  and  worked  Saturday  night,  you  would  only 
be  paid  for  Saturday  night,  and  the  office  picks 
this    money    up. 

Mr.  Gunnison — Don't  say  "  Picks  it  up," 
excuse  me;  that  man  is  paid  the  night  scale, 
the  same  as  he  would  be  in  any  other  oflficeL 


Mr.  Roi'SE — But  you  gain  the  bonus  on  the 
double    header. 

Mr.     Gunnison — No. 

Mr.   Rouse — WHo   gets  it? 

Mr.  Gunnison — He  does  not  deserve  it. 

Mr.   Rouse — Then  it  goes  back  into  the  office. 

Mr.  Gunnison — But  it  has  not  gone  into  the 
office. 

Mr.    Rouse — Then   the   money   lies   dormant. 

Mr.  Gunnison — Our  relations  are  very 
friendly  in  all  these  matters,  and  let  me  just 
make  this  point:  this  question  of  the  bonus 
does  not  amount  to  very  much  anyway,  but  if 
they  were  to  ask  us  to  pay  for  those  two  hours 
when  they  are  not  working,  then  you  are  chang- 
ing conditions,  you  are  practically  making  us 
pay  overtime,  you  are  changing  the  normal  con- 
ditions. Now,  if  the  Union  comes  into  our 
office  and  says,  "  We  will  get  out  your  paper, 
and  these  are  the  conditions  during  the  day 
afternoon  paper  'and  Sunday  morning":  but 
now  they  are  coming  in,  which  no  other  Union 
has  ever  thought  of  doing,  and  they  are  saying 
now,  "  give  us  those  two  hours."  when  they  are 
changing  from  the  afternoon  shift  to  the  night 
shift,  "  You  have  got  to  pay  us  for  that  time." 
Now,  that  is  changing  the  conditions,  the  basic 
costract  on  which  we  went  into  the  matter;  it 
exists  nowhere  else,  and  never  has  been  thought 
of.  and  I  do  not  think  I  really  intend  to  do 
that;  but  I  just  want  to  make  it  clear  that  if 
that  should  be  put  into  the  contract  you  are 
forcing  us  to  pay  an  extra  price  for  getting  out 
our  paper  under  normal  conditions.  Now,  we 
do  have  overtime,  we  have  it  Friday  nights  and 
Thursday  nights,  and  that  we  are  perfectly  will- 
ing to  pay  for,  but  for  the  normal  time  which  we 
should  have  to  get  out  our  paper  in,  under  these 
conditions  which  they  agreed  to  in  the  very 
beginning,  it  would  be  unfair  to  change  those 
conditions. 

Mr.    Morrison — It    is    now    after    one    o'clock. 

Mr.  PoLACHEK — I  would  like  to  complete  read- 
ing the  statement.  First  I  want  to  say  that 
there  is  nothing,  in  so  far  as  the  Brooklyn 
Eagle  is  concerned,  or  the  Brooklyn  papers, 
in  which  they  insist  that  the  men  who  work 
during  the  day  should  work  at  night.  There  is 
no    reason    why    a    man    should    not    put    on    a 

sub    on    Saturday 

Mr.  Oppenheimer — Mr.  Gunnison  just  stated 
why.      He   said   he   wanted  to   keep  the   day   men. 

Mr.  Gunnison — You  know  you  could  not  fur- 
nish the  men,  that  it  would  be  impossible  to 
furnish    the    men. 

Mr.  RousE^  was  just  going  to  finish  my 
statement  in  this  way:  Mr.  Gunnison  said  it  was 
changing  a  condition,  that  it  was  not  what  they 
entered  into — those  are  the  two  things  I  under- 
stood him  to  say.  Now,  when  the  Brooklyn 
Eagle  came  into  the  fold  of  organized  labor,  they 
had  a  set  figure  for  Saturday  night,  which  was 
$5.84.  That  is  a  long  time  ago.  Now,  in  1912, 
always  agreeing  with  Mr.  Gunnison  on  the  ques- 
tion of  fairness,  I  happened  to  be  one  of  those 
that  made  the  scale.  Conceding  that  it  was  un- 
fair for  a  man  to  come  from  New  York  and 
work  Saturday  night  on  the  Brooklyn  papers 
and  get  more  for  his  night's  work  than  another 
man  working  the  same  night'  on  the  New  York 
World  still  there  should  be  some  extra  compen- 
sation for  the  man  that  was  compelled  to  work 
Saturday  in  the  day  time  and  Saturday  night. 
We  then  set  upon  determining  what  was  the 
proper  pay  for  it.  The  proper  pay  was  a  dollar 
and  twenty-five  cents,  based  on  the  day  rate  of 
62Y2  cents  per  hour.  We  simply  say  that  since 
that  day  rate  has  been  advanced,  that  the  bonus 
rate  should  likewise  be  advanced,  that  the  man 
should  be  paid  for  his  continuous  time  from  the 
time  he  started  in  the  morning  until  six,  at  day 
rates,  and  if  he  works  Saturday  night  he  should 
be  paid  the  night  rate.  It  is  not  an  overtime 
rate,  because  if  it  were  overtime  it  would  be 
based  on  price  and  a  half;  but  it  is  only  single 
price  for  the  day  rate  for  the  two  hours,  because 
the  man  is  in  actual  service,  he  is  under  orders, 
and  he  can't  do  anything  else. 


22 


Mr.  Morrison — But  if  a  man  puts  on  a  sub 
who  has  not  worked  during  the  day  time? 

Mr.   Rouse — He   does  not  get  it.     They  get  it. 

Mr.  Gunnison — Let  me  say  this:  Of  course 
this  is  two  hours,  they  want  us  to  pay  for  those 
two  hours.  If  that  principle  were  established,  it 
would  cost  the  Brooklyn  papers  ten  or  twenty 
thousand  dollars  a  year,  because  we  would  have 
to  do  it  for  the  other  Unions.  Now,  the  press- 
men have  four  hours  leeway,  they  have  four 
hours  off;  and  if  this  was  established  on  this  two 
hours,  those  men  would  come  in  and  would  want 
us  to  pay  them  for  four  hours. 

Mr.  Rouse — I  disagree  with  the  gentleman, 
because  the  word  "  bonus  "  is  there,  and  it 
simply  says  a  bonus  of  so  much  shall  be  paid. 
It  does  not  say  anything  about  hours  or  con- 
tinuous time.  It  is  just  increasing  the  bonus, 
and  the  fears  of  the  gentleman  are  entirely  un- 
warranted. Furthermore,  we  are  not  concerned 
with  the  other   Unions  on  that  question. 

Mr.  Morrison — I  understand  this  is  a  bonus 
in  addition  to  the  regular  scale  because  of  the 
long  hours  work? 

Mr.  Gunnison — Yes,  but  we  claim  that  we 
ought   not   to   pay    for   those   two    hours. 

Mr.  Rouse — Increase  the  bonus.  Say  the 
bonus  shall  be  increased  so  much.  I  will  read 
that  part  of  it: 

"  All  members  working  Saturday  and  Saturday 
night  shall  receive  $1.25    ($1.81)    extra." 

We  ask  that  that  be  increased  from  a  dollar 
and  twenty-five  to  a  dollar  and  eighty-one,  or 
in  other  words  pay  them  "  continuous  time  from 
four  to   six." 

Mr.  Marquart — I  happen  to  be  one  of  the  men 
that,  work  under  those  conditions  in  Brooklyn. 
Mr.  Gunnison  made  the  statement  that  it  was 
not  a  hardship.  I  claim  it  is  a  hardship;  and  if 
Mr.  Gunnison  or  the  Publishers  can  do  anything 
to  do  away  with  the  double  header,  I  for  one 
would  like  to  see  it  done. 

Mr.  Gunnison — We  will  do  away  with  it  if  you 
will  furnish  us  the  men. 

Mr.  Marquart — He  made  the  statement  that 
the  men  get  a  day  off.  The  men  don't  get  paid 
for  that  day.  The  Publishers  don't  pay  tliem 
for  it.  The  Union  tells  him  he  cannot  work 
over  six  days,  and  he  has  got  to  go  off,  so  it  is 
not  the  publishers  that  are  paying  it. 

Mr.  PoLACiiEK — Before  I  proceed  with  the 
reading  of  the  brief  again,  I  want  to  refer  to 
Section  8.  As  to  Section  8  a  somewhat  anoma- 
lous and  yet  not  quite  similar  condition  exists  on 
evening  newspapers  which  have  a  Sunday  eve- 
ning edition.  You  will  note  that  there  has  been 
a  penalty  provided  for  such  newspapers  working 
men  on  Sunday.  Of  course  that  is  part  of  the 
normal  operation  in  this  newspaper.  It  has 
seven  evening  issues  per  week.  Men  are  not 
asked  to  work  seven  days  and  nobody  wants 
them  to;  but  a  force  sufficiently  large  to  cover 
a  seven-day  period  of  a  six  days'  work  for  each 
man  has  to  be  provided.  There  seems  to  be  no 
valid  reason  why  a  penalty  for  Sunday  work 
should  be  increased;  a  scale  might  be  increased, 
but  why  a  penalty  for  Sunday  work  should  be 
increased  does  not  appear  on  the  surface  of 
things.  And  the  Union  has  here  increased  the 
penalty  for  Sunday  work  a  dollar  and  a  half. 
The  scale  ought  to  apply  to  every  day  in  the 
week  that  a  newspaper  is  publishing  under  nor- 
mal conditions.  The  Sunday  evening  edition  of 
the  New  York  Telegram  is  under  a  normal  con- 
dition, and  the  New  York  Telegram  has  for 
years  published  seven  days  a  week  in  the  after- 
noons, and  the  .Sunday  afternoon  the  same  as 
any  other  afternoon.  They  make  no  penalty  for 
Saturday  night's  work,  running  over  into  Sunday 
morning  to  the  morning  papers,  yet  they  penalize 
the  Evening  Telegram  for  its  evening  edition 
on  Sunday.  That  penalty  has  been  in  effect  for 
some  years,  and  admitting  that  it  was  all  right, 
they  paid  it  at  that  time.  Now  they  want  a 
raise  in  the  scale,  and  they  also  want  a  raise 
in  the  Evening  Telegram  or  a  Sunday  afternoon 
penalty.      I    do   not   think   that   is  justified. 

Mr.  Oppenheimer — I  want  to  answer  that,  Mr. 
Arbitrator. 


Mr.  PoLACHEK — You  can  answer  that,  Mr. 
Oppenheimer,  in  your  rebuttal.  I  just  want  to 
put  that  in  the  record  now.  Now  I  will  go  on 
with  the  reading  of  the  brief: 

"When  you  consider  that  the  large  Sunday 
editions  are  a  part  of  the  normal  operating  con- 
ditions in  the  newspaper  offices,  it  would  seem 
only  logical  that  the  Union  which  makes  an 
exclusive  contract  to  do  the  work  in  those  news- 
paper offices,  would  make  such  conditions  that 
the  regular  normal  work  of  the  newspaper  could 
be  handled  without  overtime  penalties,,  but  the 
Union  has  in  no  case  seen  fit  to  meet  this  obli- 
gation which  normal  conditions  placed  upon   it. 

Therefore,  we  feel  it  would  be  extremely  un- 
just for  an  arbitrator  to  place  on  our  shoulders 
an  additional  burden  on  overtime  account  which 
the  Publisher  could  not  escape  because  the  work- 
ing conditions  under  the  present  scale  and  con- 
tract make  it  impossible  to  avoid  overtime  in  tlie 
production   of   Sunday   newspapers. 

We  call  the  arbitrator's  attention  to  sections 
7  and  8  of  the  Agreed  Statement  of  Facts.  Sec- 
tion 7  applies  to  such  evening  newspapers  as 
publish  Sunday  morning  editions  and  Section  8 
applies  to  such  evening  newspapers  as  publish 
Sunday  evening  editions.  Again  we  state  that 
this  is  the  normal  operation  of  these  particular 
newspapers  and  this  Typographical  Union  under- 
takes to  make  an  exclusive  contract  for  the  oper- 
ation of  these  newspapers.  Now,  it  follows  that 
this  Union  should  make  the  normal  operation  of 
these  newspapers  as  nearly  as  possible,  the  nor- 
mal working  conditions  in  the  composing  rooms 
on  normal  regular  scale  basis.  However,  the 
Publishers  have  from  time  to  time  yielded  to  the 
importunities  of  the  Union  and  permitted  differ- 
entiation in  scales  for  such  contingencies  and  the 
arbitrator  will  note  that  in  section  7  evening 
newspapers  with  Sunday  morning  editions  were 
penalized  by  an  added  rate  and  shortening  of 
hours  for  Saturday  niglit  service  and  similarly 
in  Section  8  evening  papers  with  Sunday  eve- 
ning editions  were  penalized  for  Sunday  work 
entailed  in  producing  the  Sunday  evening  news- 
paper. 

Now,  not  content  with  the  penalty  already 
imposed  which  we  point  out  to  the  arbitrator  is 
not  a  part  of  the  scale  of  wages  or  better  still, 
the  standard  of  wages,  the  Typographical  Union 
in  its  presentation  of  its  demands  has  also  in- 
creased these  penalties  which,  the  Publishers  con- 
tend, is  entirely  unjustifiable. 

The  arbitrator's  attention  is  called  to  the  fact 
that  the  Publishers  have  not  asked  an  abatement 
of  the  penalty  previously  exacted,  but  the  Pub- 
lishers do  resist  the  demand  for  an  increase  in 
basic  scale,  and  the  Publishers  ask  the  arbitrator 
to  rule  that  in  making  the  wage  scale,  it  is  not 
his  intention  to  change  such  penalties  imposed 
either    by    increasing   or   decreasing. 

Section  14  of  the  Agreed  Statement  of  Fact 
applies  to  extras.  In  the  previous  arbitration 
before  Mr.  Mitchell,  the  matter  of  extras  was 
threshed  out  in  great  detail  and  as  a  result  of 
the  argument,  the  Publishers  were  awarded  the 
verdict.  We  quote  from  the  decision  of  the 
arbitrator    on    this   point: 

Section  14  of  the  Publishers'  proposal  which 
is  offered  as  a  substitute  for  Section  14  of  the 
Agreement  that  expired  June  .10th,  would,  if 
approved,  authorize  the  Publishers  to  employ  for 
more  than  one  day  or  night  at  a  time  extra  men 
when  needed,  instead  of  limiting  the  employ- 
ment of  such  extra  men  for  one  shift  at  a  time. 

Under  the  agreement  which  expired  June  .10th, 
as  the  arbitrator  understands  it.  when  the  Pub- 
lisher has  extra  work  to  do  on.  say  three  days 
of  a  week  he  may  not  by  one  hiring,  employ  .1 
printer  for  these  three  days,  but  must,  if  there  be 
three  days'  work  to  do  on  consecutive  _  d.a^s, 
either  employ  the  same  printer  at  the  bcginnmg 
of  each  day  or  employ  a  different  printer  for 
each  of  the   consecutive   days. 

In  support  of  their  claim  for  greater  latitude 
in  employment  of  extra  hands  the  Publishers 
contend  that  the  present  arrangement  is  unsat- 
isfactory. That  during  the  rush  period  they  are 
frequently  embarrassed  in  securing  extra  hands 
and  they  state  that  it  would  afford  some  rheasurc 
of  relief  if  the  agreement  were  so  drawn  or  the 
award  so  worded  as  to  give  them  the  right  by 
one  hiring  to  employ  men  to  do  extra  work  for  a 
period  of  several   days. 


23 


Ill  <ii>i'.>~,ii ':•.  ;  '  i..!^  I'.wnosal  the  printers  con- 
trnd  tli.it  thi-  ;ul,ipiuiii  ot  tlio  section  as  i>ro- 
IX'sril  t>.v  the  I'liMishers  would  interfere  with 
thr  s  ■  .tu'u  of  sulistitutcs  hy  regular  situation 
1.   ;  ;  .i!ni    that    it   misht   establish    in   the   trade 

.1  ,  ...iivf  of  j>art  time  situation  holdinij  and 
the  I'rr.ikinR  down  of  the  priority  principle  and 
practice  which  has  for  many  years  been  recog- 
nized in  newspaper  otTiccs. 

In  considering  this  proposed  change  it  seems 
to  nie  that  the  Publishers  should  be  accorded 
the  right  to  employ  members  of  the  Union  to  do 
extra  work  for  more  than  one  day  at  a  time, 
but  not  for  a  sufficient  number  of  days  to  inter- 
fere with  the  work  or  the  opportunities  to  work 
of  regular  situation  holders.  Furlherniore,  it 
seems  necessary  in  order  to  avoid  favoritism  and 
to  allay  apprehension  that  a  rule  should  be  adopt- 
ed regarding  the  employment  of  excra  hands, 
which,  while  giving  the  Puhlishers  reasonable 
latitude,  shall  not  make  favoritism  possible.  To 
that  end  it  is  decided  that  extra  hands  may  in 
one  hiring  be  employed  for  a  period  not  to  ex- 
Veed  three  days  in  any  one  week  and  it  is 
recommended  to  the  joint  conference  committee 
that  a  meeting  be  held  at  an  early  date  to  draw 
an  agreement  which  shall  embody  this  decision 
of  the  Arbitrator  and  the  suggestion  made  in  con- 
nection therewith.  Should  the  joint  conference 
committee  fail  to  agree  upon  the  language  of 
such  a  section  prior  to  August  15th,  the  arbitrator 
will  undertake  to  draft  a  section  and  when  it  is 
so  drafted  it  will  become  a  part  of  the  decision 
rendered   herewith. 

The  Publishers  and  the  Typographical  Union 
attempted  to  frame  a  section  in  conformity  with 
this  decision  and  failing  to  do  so,  the  matter 
was  re-referred  to  the  Arbitrator  for  a  ruling,  as 
a  result  of  which  the  Arbitrator  drew  the  sec- 
tion which  is  incorporated  in  the  Typographical 
Union's  section  number  fourteen  of  the  Agreed 
Statement   of   Fact. 

The  Publishers  found  that  the  operation  under 
this  section  as  drawn  by  Mr.  Mitchell  was  un- 
satisfactory in  that  very  competent  extras  who, 
having  been  given  three  days'  successive  work 
under  that  section  in  one  week,  were  debarred 
from  any  further  work  until  all  other  men  avail- 
able on  the  substitute  list  had  been  provided 
with  work  in  that  week  or  in  the  next  succeed- 
ing  week. 

In  other  words,  a  man  who,  showing  special 
competency,  would,  owing  to  the  priority  rule 
of  the  Typographical  Union,  be  debarred  from 
a  regular  situation  until  his  turn  on  the  list 
of  eligibles  was  reached  and  he  could  not  be 
given  work  three  days  a  week  if  available  two 
successive  weeks  because  of  fear  of  the  Union 
that  this  authority  to  give  such  work  would 
result   in   favoritism  on   the   part  of  the  foreman. 

The  Publisher  would  state  to  the  arbitrator 
that  the  Typographical  Union  is  a  very  powerful 
organization  which  maintains  the  most  excellent 
discipline  among  its  members,  and  among  its 
members  are  included  all  the  foremen  of  all  the 
shops,  and  an  injustice  to  any  member  of  the  or- 
ganization perpetrated  by  a  foi'eman  is  almost 
invariably  a  matter  for  action  by  the  Union  or 
its  executive  committee,  and  it  appears  to  the 
publishers  that  if  there  were  a  real  danger  of 
a  display  of  favoritism  by  foremen,  it  certainly 
could  not  be  an  obnoxious  form  of  favoritism 
or  it  would  be  susceptible  of  handling  through 
the  Union  or  its  executive  committee,  and  it 
appears  further  to  the  Publishers  that  it  is  not 
a  part  of  the  duty  of  the  Publishers  to  embody 
in  its  contracts,  features  which  are  intended  to 
piotect  Union  men  against  each  other.  The 
Union  is  amply  able  to  do  that  and  the  opera- 
tions in  the  composing  rooms  of  the  Publishers 
should  not  be  hampered  for  any  such  reasons. 

The  wording  of  the  section  as  proposed  by  the 
Publishers  does  not  in  their  opinion  present  any 
element  of  unfairness  to  the  Union.  All  that 
the  Publishers  ask  is  that  the  phrase  "  but  the 
same  extra  may  not  be  so  employed  in  two 
consecutive  weeks  if  others  are  available  "  be 
stricken  out. 

This  does  not  mean  that  it  would  create  three 
day  situations,  but  it  does  mean  that  the  Pub- 
lisher would  have  an  opportunity  to  keep  on  his 
substitute  list,  through  giving  as  much  work  as 
possible,  a  thoroughly  competent  man  whom  he 
desired  eventually  to   put  on   his  regular   list  and 


he  would  thus  be  enabled  to  keep  that  man  on 
his  extra  list  in  a  happy  frame  of  mind  until 
the  available  position  were  open.  Otherwise,  the 
man  might  reach  the  conclusion  that  he  had  a 
better  chance  of  securing  a  regular  situation  in 
some  other  shop  or  in  a  job  printing  plant  and 
thus  eliminate  himself  from  the  extra  list  of  the 
newspaper    which    really    wanted    him. 

The  Publishers  therefore  earnestly  request 
that  the  Arbitrator  incorporate  the  Publishers' 
Section  number  fourteen  as  his  view  of  the 
proper   reading  of  that  secfion. 

The  Publishers  have  deleted  sections  nine  and 
ten  of  the  Typographical  Union's  statement  of 
Fact  from  their  statement  because  if  the  arbi- 
trator should  please  to  rule  in  favor  of  the  Pub- 
lishers on  the  question  of  two  shifts,  those  sec- 
tions  would    be    unnecessary. 

A  discussion  of  the  working  conditions  be- 
tween publishers  and  foremen  individually  in 
each  case  has  produced  a  concensus  of  opinion, 
that  if  the  two  shifts  were  provided,  there  would 
bo  no  requirement  for  work  covering  the  unusual 
hours  now  provided  for  what  is  known  as  the 
third  shift.  The  third  shift  hours  are  very  bad: 
2  a.  m.  to  10  m  the  morning.  2  a.  m.  is  an 
unearthly  hour  for  a  man  to  report  to  work,  yet 
in  order  to  be  covered  up  to  S  or  6  o'clock  in  the 
morning,  newspapers  have  to  resort  to  this 
third  shift  or  hold  men  oveitinie.  With  a  proper 
phalanx  men  could  be  brought  to  work  at  nine 
o'clock  at  night  and  be  through  their  work  by 
five  o'clock  in  the  morning  and  meet  practically 
all  the  requirements  of  the  newspapers  now 
using  the  third  shift,  and  these  hours  would  not 
be  abnormal  hours  for  night  workers  and  the 
night  worker  is  compensated  as  the  Arbitrator  will 
note  by  an  additional  sum  of  $3  per  week  over 
the   day   scale. 

The  Publishers  again  request  the  arbitrator 
to  consider  their  operating  needs  in  his  de- 
cision and  they  submit  the  case  to  him  in  full 
confidence  that  he  will  mete  out  justice  to  both 
parties. 

On  behalf  of  the  Publishers'  Association  I 
wish  to  thank  the  Arbitrator  for  his  courtesy 
and  for  his  generosity  in  devoting  his  valuable 
time  to  the  hearing  of  the  arguments  in  this 
case   and   to   the   framing   of  a  verdict. 

Mr.  PoL.\CHEK — We  have  nothing  further 
prepared.     We   rest. 

At  this  point  a  recess  was  taken  until  2.30 
p.  m. 


After   Recess. 

Mr.  Rouse — This  is  the  argument  of  the 
Union  against  the  proposition  as  proposed  by 
the    Publishers: 

(Reading) :  At  the  time  of  negotiation  be- 
tween the  Publishers  and  the  Scale  Conference 
Committee  of  No.  6,  immediately  preceding  the 
last  previous  arbitration  proceedings,  the  fol- 
lowing remark  was  made  by  a  representative 
of  the  Publishers  Association:  "If  we  have  to 
go   to   arbitration,   let's   get   all   we   can." 

Almost  identical  with  the  foregoing  quotation 
was  a  remark  dropped  by  a  representative  of  the 
Publishers  preceding  these  arbitration  proceed- 
ings, to  wit:  "I  want  to  go  to  arbitration;  we 
may  get  something  out  of  it." 

The  amendments  proposed  by  the  Publishers 
(1)  eliminating  the  "(including  30  minutes  for 
lunch),"  (2)  that  the  eight  hours  be  between  6 
and  6,  and  (3)  the  elimination  in  Section  14 
of  the  last  3  words  of  the  fourth  line  and  the 
fifth  and  sixth  lines,  are  the  effect  of  that 
thought. 

These  working  conditions  that  the  publishers 
seek  to  amend  have  been  a  part  of  the  news- 
paper scale  for  more  than  a  quarter  of  a  cen- 
tury. "(Including  30  minutes  for  lunch)"  has 
tieen  in  the  scale  since  1906;  "the  working  hours 
to  be  between  8  a.  m.  and  6  p.  m.,  and  6  p.  m. 
and  3  a.  m."  has  been  in  our  scale  for  29 
years. 

AT  THIS  TIME  WE  WISH  EMPHATIC- 
ALLY TO  REITERATE  THE  POSITION  WE 
ASSUMED  IN  THE  PRECEDING  ARBITRA- 
TION PROCEEDINGS,  WHICH  WE  WOULD 
RESPECTFULLY  IMPRESS  MOST  INDEL- 
IBLY UPON  THE  ATTENTION  OF  THE 
ARBITRATOR,  THAT  WE  WOULD  RATHER 
STRUGGLE     ALOS'G     AS     BEST     WE     MAY 


24 


THAN  SUBMIT  TO  ANY  OF  THE  CHANGES 
OF  WORKING  CONDITIONS  AS  PRO- 
POSED BY  THE  PUBLISHERS  ASSOCIA- 
TION. 

In  all  scale  negotiations  between  the  pub- 
lishers and  No.  6  these  changes  are  proposed 
and  inevitably  denied  as  not  warranted  or  justi- 
fied. 

The  predominating  idea  on  the  part  of  the 
publishers  in  asking  for  these  chang:es  seems 
to  be  simply  this:  "We  know  the  printers  are 
entitled  to  an  adequate  raise  and  there  is  no 
doubt  that  the  arbiter  will  so  direct.  But  let 
us   try    and   get    something   in    return." 

This  whole  matter  was  threshed  out  only 
nine  months  ago  in  arbitration  proceedings  be- 
fore   the    Hon.    John    Mitchell. 

The  reasons  for  opposing  the  changes  at  that 
time  are  just  as  pertinent  now,  if  not  more  so. 

We  respectfully  submit  for  the  consideration 
of  the  present  arbiter  and  as  our  argument 
against  granting  the  proposed  changes  by  the 
Publishers  of  the  working  conditions  existing 
for  many  years,  extracts  from  the  record  of 
the  arbitration  proceedings  before  the  Hon. 
John  Mitchell  in  July,  1918,  relative  to  the  same 
proposition. 

Herewith  is  presented  the  argument  of  No. 
6  and   the  comments  of   Arbitrator   Mitchell: 

"Herewith  we  submit  a  summary  of  our 
reasons  why  the  amendments  to  the  scale 
of  prices  submitted  by  the  Publishers  should 
not    be    allowed. 

"For  a  number  of  years  we  have  'worked 
under  the  present  scale,  and,  so  far  as 
working  conditions  are  concerned,  without 
any  serious  friction. 

"There  seems  to  be  absolutely  no  reason 
why  the  Publishers  should  propose  any  of 
the  amendments  offered  other  than  the  one 
that,  admitting  the  high  cost  of  living  ne- 
cessitates an  increase  in  wage,  the  Pub- 
lishers were  anxious  to  receive  something 
in    return. 

"This  by  itself  may  strike  one  as  be- 
ing not  an  unfair  proposition. 

"But   what    is    it    the    Publishers    ask? 

"In  these  papers  submitted  to  you,  Mr. 
Arbitrator,  we  believe  we  have  given  conclu- 
sive evidence  that  the  admission  of  any 
of  the  amendments  of  the  Publishers,  nearly 
all  of  them  of  a  revolutionary  character, 
would  result  in  a  decrease  in  wage  and  a 
most  outrageous  limitation  of  the  hours  of 
labor. 

"As  intimated  before,  we  don't  believe 
the    Publishers    are    serious    in    this    matter. 

"We  believe  the  thought  that  actuated 
the  offering  of  the  amendments  was  the 
one  expressed  by  a  representative  of  the 
Publishers  at  a  meeting  of  the  Joint  Con- 
ference Committee,  to  wit:  "If  we  have  to 
go   to   arbitration,   let's  get   all   we   can." 

"Mr.  Arbitrator,  in  addition  to  the  rea- 
sons already  submitted,  we  object  to  the 
adoption  of  any  and  all  of  the  amend- 
ments offered  by  the  Publishers  on  the 
ground,  as  expressed  by  President  Wilson 
and  the  War  Board,  that  there  should  be 
no  change  of  the  working  conditions  of 
labor  during  the  war;  that  there  is  no  valid 
reason  for  changing  these  conditions  now; 
that,  as  we  have  already  submitted,  if  times 
were  normal  we  should  ask  in  addition,  to  a 
wage  raise,  a  reduction  in  hours;  that  all 
the  allied  crafts  employed  by  the  publishers 
in  getting  out  their  papers  are  working 
under  the  same,  if  not  better,  time  limita- 
tions as  the  newspaper  printers;  that  the 
present  working  conditions  have  existed  for 
many  years  and  have  worked  out  har- 
moniously. 

"Sec.  4.  This  takes  away  our  30  minutes 
for  lunch,  and  adds  one-half  hour  to  the 
working  day.  The  8  hour  working  day 
(including  30  minutes  for  lunch)  has  been 
established  since  1906.  Previous  to  that 
time  it  had  been  20  minutes.  In  1906  the 
Publishers'  Association  with  a  committee 
from  No.  6  agreed  to  make  the  change  from 
20  to  30  minutes.  This  condition  has  al- 
ways worked  well  because  of  the  fact  that 
in     newspaper    composing    rooms     the     hours 


must  be  continuous  and  the  entire  force 
does  not  go  to  lunch  at  the  same  time.  We 
believe  that  the  only  reason  this  proposi- 
tion is  submitted,  is  because  we  have  asked 
for  a  wage  increase,  and,  if  admitted,  would 
amount  to  a  reduction  in  wage.  Under  our 
present  scale  this  would  be  a  half  hour 
overtime  per  night,  55  cents,  which  for 
the  week  would  amount  to  $.5-'^0-  Thus,  if 
this  section  were  admitted  it  would  mean,  in 
effect,   a  reduction   of  $3.30  per  week. 

"  Aside  from  any  monetary  considera- 
tion, we  protest  most  emphatically  against 
any  additional  time  being  added  to  the 
number  of   hours   constituting  a  day's  work. 

"It  is  an  established  fact  that  the  work 
of  the  printer  is  unhealthful.  In  the  report 
of  the  United  States  Department  of  Labor, 
April,  1917,  Bureau  of  Labor  Statistics,  un- 
der "Hygiene  of  the  Printing  Trades," 
page   6,  in  the  following: 

"Mr.  Rouse — Before  quoting  it,  I  will 
submit  for  the  inspection  of  the  Arbitrator 
the  document  "  Hygiene  of  the  Printing 
Trades"  by  Alice  Hamilton  and  Charles  H. 
Verill.  We  could  note  a  voluminous  num- 
ber of  exhibits  in  support  of  our  contention, 
but  we  will  simply  submit  the  hook  and 
quote   the   first  two   paragraphs   as   follows: 

"In  all  countries  the  printers  trade  has 
been  considered  an  occupation  unhealthful 
beyond  the  average,  and  this  belief  is  borne 
out  by  statistics,  which  show  an  abnormally 
high  sickness  rate,  and  death  rate  for  print- 
ers as  compared  with  all  occupied  males. 

"Examinations  of  all  available  sources  of 
information  in  the  United  States  shows  that 
in  this  country  the  printers  trade  is  produc- 
tive of  more  illness  than  would  be  expected 
in  an  industry  where  wages  are  high,  hours 
usually  not  long,  and  where  there  is  no 
gross  contamination  of  the  air  nor  exposure 
to  excessive  heat  or  cold,  nor  over-exertion. 
American  printers  suffer  far  more  from 
tuberculosis  than  do  occupied  males  in  gen- 
eral." 

Mr.   Rouse   (Reading)  : 

"This  refers  to  printers  in  general,  hut 
the  condition  of  the  newspaper  printer  is 
even  more  serious,  because  of  the  fact  that 
while  he  is  subject  to  all  the  conditions  of 
the  ordinary  printer,  his  work  is  many 
times  more  nerve-racking  in  consequence 
of  the  speed  with  which  all  newspaper  work 
is  accompanied.  As  stated  elsewhere  in  our 
brief,  our  determination  to  stand  by  the 
declaration  of  the  President  not  to  disturb 
existing  working  conditions  prevents  us 
from  asking  for  a  decrease  in  the  hours 
of  labor.  The  everlasting  introduction  of 
•  new  machinery  necessitates  the  constant 
speeding  up  of  the  newspaper  printer,  call- 
ing for  an  additional  display  of  skill,  plac- 
ing an  additional  burden  upon  his  physical 
and  a  corresponding  strain  upon  his  nerve 
power. 

"It  may  be  interesting  to  note  how  this 
30  minutes  for  lunch  originated.  Prior  to 
1906  the  members  worked  eight  continuous 
hours  (including  20  minutes  for  lunch). 
It  was  conceded  tliat  20  minutes  for  lunch 
was  inadequate,  and  on  September  26,  l'>06, 
the  time  was  extended  to  30  minutes,  in  cor- 
roboration of  which  we  submit  the  follow- 
ing: 

"  New  York   City, 
September  26,  1906. 
"James    J.     Murphy,     Esq.,     74     Lafayette 
Street,    New    York. 

"My  dear  Mr.  Murphy:  At  a  meet- 
ing of  the  Publishers'  Association,  held 
tins  afternoon,  the  committee  appointed  to 
meet  your  committee,  consisting  of 
Messrs.  Cook  and  Williams,  reported  in 
favor  of  granting  thirty  minutes  for 
lunch  in.stead  of  twenty  minutes.  The 
report  was  favorably  received  and  on 
motion  was  carried  and  adopted.  The 
change   is   to   go    into   effect    forthwith. 

"Yours  very  truly, 

"T.  T.   WiixrAMs." 


25 


"This  letter  is  proof  that  tlie  thirty 
minutrs  for  lunch  was  conceded  volun- 
larilv  by  the   PuMishers'  Association. 

■•\Ve  'respectfully  call  your  particular  at- 
tention also  to  working  hours,  their  limita- 
tions and  lunch  time,  of  the  photo-en- 
gravers, pressmen  and  stcreotyptTs,  all 
under  contract  with  the  Publishers'  Associa- 
tion. 

"Scale  Contract  Between   Publishers  and 
Photo-Kngravers'    Union 
"Day  work,   S  hours,  between  8  a.   m.   and 

6  p.    m.,    30    minutes    for    lunch    on    office 
time. 

"Night  work,  7}  hours,  between  6  p.  m. 
and  3  a.  m.,  30  minutes  for  lunch  on  of- 
fice   time. 

"Third  shift,  7§  hours,  between  11  p.  m. 
and  8  a.  m.,  30  minutes  for  lunch  on  of- 
fice time. 

"Mr.  Mitchell — Is  that  the  present  con- 
tract ? 

"Mr.  Rouse — That  is  the  present  con- 
tract. The  photo-engravers'  contract  runs 
until  1920,  just  consummated  about  a  year 
ago. 
(Reading.) 
"Scale  Contract  Between  Publishers  and 
Pressmen's  Union  No.  25. 

"Day  work,  8  hours,  between  8  a.   m.   and 

7  p.    m.,    30    minutes    for    lunch    on    office 
time. 

"Night  work,  6  hours,  between  12  night 
and  6  a.  m. 

"Saturday  night,  8  hours,  between  6  p. 
m.  and  5  a.  m.,  30  minutes  for  lunch  on 
office  time. 

"Scale   Contract  With    Stereotypers.    . 

"Day  work.  8  hours,  between  8  a.  m.  and 
7  p.  m.,  30  minutes  for  lunch  on  office  time. 

"Night  work,  6  hours,  between  11  p.  m. 
and   5  a.  m. 

"Sunday,  6  hours,  between  8  a.  m.  and 
7  p.  m. 

"A  perusal  of  the  foregoing  facts  cer- 
tainly would  indicate  that  the  proposition  to 
take  away  the  thirty  minutes  for  lunch  and 
add  one-half  hour  to  the  working  day  of 
the  newspaper  printer  is  not  honest  and 
most  unfair,  and  seems  to  be  submitted  for 
no  other  reason  except  that  the  newspaper 
printers  have  requested  an  increase  in 
wage. 

"The  Hours  to  be  Between  6  P.  M.  and 
6    A.    M. 

"In  contemplating  this  proposition  we 
stand  aghast.  This  is  most  vicious  and 
revolutionary.  The  present  limitation  has 
been  in  vogue  since  1890 — 28  years,  and  is 
in  the  scale  contracts  (as  submitted),  of  the 
Publishers  Association  with  the  Photo-En- 
gravers, Pressmen  and  Stereotypers.  If 
this  change  were  allowed,  men  could  be 
called  to  work  at  any  hour  of  the  day  or 
night.  •  «  *  There  is  absolutely  no  good 
reason  for  desiring  this  change.  The  pres- 
ent system  has  worked  well  in  all  the  28 
years  it  was  in  vogue.  If  for  any  unfore- 
seen reason  or  emergency  it  becomes  neces- 
sary to  call  members  to  the  office  before  the 
hours  specified  in  the  limitations,  the  office 
has  the  right  to  do  so  under  the  present 
scale,  and  always  had  that  right.  Imagine  a 
man  in  Jersey,  Long  Island,  Staten  Island 
and  surrounding  suburbs,  or  even  the  one 
dwelling  at  the  extreme  end  of  the  city  be- 
ing called  at  6  or  even  7  o'clock.  In  many 
cases  the  time  of  his  leaving  home  would  be 
4  o'clock  a.  m.  To  admit  this  proposition 
would  mean  in  most  cases  an  entire  change 
of   living    conditions. 

"Furthermore,  as  we  have  stated  before, 
and  are  compelled  to  reiterate,  there  is  ab- 
solutely no  reason  why  there  should  be  any 
change  in  a  condition  that  has  worked  well 
and   harmoniously   for   28   years.     »     •     » 

"  For  more  than  a  quarter  of  a  century, 
and  up  to  the  present  time,  a  man  worked 
either  by  day  or  by  night.  In  1898,  for  the 
benefit    of    the    Publishers,    a    '  third  '    shift, 


known  as  the  '  lobster  '  shift,  was  inaugu- 
rated. This  shift  was  of  7  hours'  duration, 
including  30  minutes  for  lunch,  the  limita- 
tion of  these  hours  being  between  2  a.  m. 
and  10  a.  m.  In  1907  the  seven  hours  were 
advanced  to  eight,  but  in  1910  they  were  re- 
duced to  7A  and  have  remained  so  ever 
since.  In  consideration  of  these  extraor- 
dinary hours  the  '  lobster  '  shift  was  and  is 
paid   $3   per   week  over   the  night  scale. 

■'  But  hard  as  these  hours  are  you  will 
please  bear  in  mind  that  they  are  limited 
between  2  a.  m.  and  10  a.  m.  These  hours 
cannot  be  shifted  or  juggled,  and  hard  as 
they  be,  they  are  at  least  permanent,  and, 
like  everything  else,  in  time  men  working 
on  this  shift,  after  regulating  their  living 
conditions  accordingly,  become  accustomed 
to    the    same   and    are   more    or   less    satisfied. 

"  But  no  such  thing  under  Section  5, 
which  is  very  plain  and  open  to  no  other 
construction  than  the  one  enumerated  in  our 
objection  to  this  section.  Under  this  sec- 
tion there  could  be  no  regulation  of  lii-ing 
conditions  because  there  would  be  no  regu- 
larity. In  No.  2  of  the  'Summary  of  Pub- 
lishers' Arjiument,"  they  speak  of  '  an  hon- 
est, fair  and  patriotic  request.'  We  doubt 
the  honesty,  we  deny  the  fairness,  and  if 
this  is  a  sample  of  the  patriotism,  God  help 
us.'  Under  this  section,  if  a  foreman  were 
so  disposed,  a  regular  situation  holder,  what- 
ever his  length  of  faithful  service  and  how- 
ever competent,  could  be  shifted  from  day 
to  day,  and  his  hours  made  so  obnoxious  as 
to  compel  him  to  resign  his  situation  and 
seek  work  elsewhere  or  be  driven  out  of  the 
trade  entirely. 

By    Mr.    Mitchell — 

"  Sections  4,  5,  6,  7  and  8  of  the  Pub- 
lishers' proposed  agreement,  apart  from  their 
bearing  on  the  wage  scale,  relate  to  the 
hours  of  labor.  By  these  sections  it  is 
proposed  to  modify  what  for  many  years  has 
been  the  custom  among  printers  in  New 
York  newspaper  offices  of  working  eight  con- 
tinuous hours,  including  thirty  minutes  for 
lunch,  by  requiring  them  to  work  full  eight 
hours  (instead  of  seven  and  one-half  hours). 
"  In  support  of  their  claim  for  an  exten- 
sion of  the  hours  of  labor  the  Publishers 
introduce  evidence  to  show  that  in  an  over- 
whelming majority  of  newspaper  offices  in 
the  United  States  printers  contract  to  work 
full  eight  hours  per  day,  lunch  being  taken 
on  their  own  time  and  not  on  office  time, 
as  is  the  practice  in  New  York  City.  There 
are,  it  is  stated  by  the  Publishers,  a  number 
of  exceptions  to  this  rule.  Furthermore,  the 
Publishers  contend  that  the  eight-hour  day 
is  V  onsistent  with  the  demand  and  policy 
of  organized  labor  in  all  branches  of  indus- 
try and  that  inasmuch  as  the  Publishers  do 
and  are  willing  to  pay  the  highest  wage 
scale  obtaining  in  newspaper  offices  in  the 
United  States,  they  have  a  right  to  expect 
in    return   full   eight   hours'   work. 

"  This  claim  and  the  arguments  in  support 
of    it    would    carry    greater    weight    and    con- 
viction   if    their    premises    were    correct    and 
if   times    were   normal.      THE   F.A.CTS    ARE, 
AS   SHOWN   FY  THE   EVIDENCE.  THAT 
A  FORTY-FIVE   HOUR  ACTUAL  WORK- 
ING      WEEK       PREVAILS       IN       MANY 
NEWSPAPER    OFFICES.      Furthermore,    it 
is     a     matter     of     common     knowledge     that 
FORTY-FOUR       HOURS       CONSTITUTE 
THE  WEEK'S  WORK  OR  PRACTICALLY 
ALL     SKILLED     TRADESMEN,    exclusive 
of    printers,    in    New    York    and    in    most    of 
the    large    cities   of    the    country." 
Mr.   Rouse — In   support  of  that  I   wish  to   sub- 
mit  for   the   Arbitrator's   consideration   the   Build- 
ing   Trades    wages    of    1919,    with    the    correction 
of    the    wages    for    1919    on    the    second    column 
showing    increases    that    have    been    granted    since 
1918.      In   all    of   these   trades   every   one   worked 
forty-four    hours    per    week    and    received    double 
price   for   overtime. 

Mr.  Polachek — I  would  like  to  say  that  those 
people  are  paid  on  an  eight-hour  day  basis  and 
paid  only  for  five  and  a  half  days,  and  most  of 
them    at    present    are    out    of    work. 


26 


Mr.  Rouse — They  are  paid  on  Saturdays  for 
full  eight  hours.  They  cannot  lay  them  off  on 
Saturdays,    they    have    got    to    pay    them. 

Mr.  Oppenheimer — Also  notice  that  the  limita- 
tion in  hours  is  between  eight  and  five,  similar 
to    our    limitation. 

Mr.  PoLACHEK — It  is  a  different  character  of 
industry. 

Mr.  Rouse — In  support  of  the  contention  here 
that  "  It  is  a  matter  of  common  knowledge  that 
forty-four  hours  constitute  the  week's  work  of 
practically  all  skilled  tradesmen,"  I  offer  this 
Building  Trades  wages  of  1919  that  I  have 
referred   to. 

(Marked  Exhibit  N.) 
(Continuing   reading    Mr.    Mitchell's    decision:) 

"  At  present,  using  the  night  scale  as 
the  basis,  printers  receive  within  a  frac- 
tion of  i78  cents  per  hour,  actual  work- 
ing time.  To  add  three  hours  per  week 
to  the  actual  working  time  might  well  be 
considered  as  a  reduction  of  $2.34  per  week. 
THIS  WOULD  PRACTICALLY  NUL- 
LIFY THE  INCREASE  IN  WAGES 
GRANTED  IN  THIS  ARBITRATION; 
IT  WOULD  BE  TANTAMOUNT  TO  GIV- 
ING WITH  ONE  HAND  AND  TAKING 
AWAY  WITH  THE  OTHER.  FURTHER- 
MORE TO  INCREASE  THE  HOURS  OF 
LABOR  OF  WORKMEN  WHO  HAVE 
FOR  SO  MANY  YEARS  BEEN  EM- 
PLOYED AND  PAID  FOR  SEVEN  AND 
ONE-HALF  HOURS'  ACTUAL  WORK- 
ING TIME  WOULD  BE  UNJUSTIFI- 
ABLE AND  AT  THE  PRESENT  TIME 
INDEFENSIBLE.  Again,  were  there  no 
other  valid  reasons  for  denying  the  proposal 
to  lengthen  the  working  day  the  arbitrator 
should  not  disregard  the  pronouncement  of 
the  President  of  the  United  States  in  veto- 
ing an  Act  of  Congress  requiring  govern- 
ment employees,  in  consideration  of  an 
advance  in  salary,  to  work  eight  hours  in- 
stead of  seven  hours  per  day.  This  pro- 
nouncement has  been  accepted  everywhere 
as  the  enunciation  of  a  policy  that  has  a 
direct  bearing  upon  the  successful  prosecu- 
tion of  the  war.  It  bears  so  directly  upon 
the  question  here  at  issue  that  it  seems 
proper  that  it  should  be  made  a  part  of 
these    findings. 

"The    President    said: 

"  At  the  outset  of  the  war  I  felt  it  my 
duty  to  urge  all  employers  in  the  United 
States  to  make  a  special  effort  to  see  to  it 
that  the  conditions  of  labor  were  in  no 
respect  altered  unfavorably  first  how  directly 
the  strain  of  this  war  is  to  bear  upon  those 
who  do  the  labor  which  underlies  the  whole 
process  of  mobilizing  the  nation,  and  it 
seemed  to  me  at  the  outset,  as  it  seems  to 
me  now,  that  it  is  of  the  highest  impor- 
tance that  the  advantages  which  have  been 
accorded  labor  before  the  war  began  should 
not  be  subtracted  from  or  abated." 

"  Considering  all  these  elements,  taking 
into  account  the  fact  that  in  newspaper  of- 
fices in  twenty-two  cities  the  hours  range 
from  thirty-six  to  forty-eight  and  in  twenty- 
four  cites  the  hours  range  from  a  minimum 
of  forty-one  to  a  maximum  of  forty-seven 
and  average  forty-five  per  week,  CONSID- 
ERING THE  FACT  THAT  IN  MOST 
SKILLED  TRADES,  EXCLUSIVE  OF 
THE  PRINTINC;  TRADE,  THE  HOURS 
OF  LABOR  ARE  LESS  THAN  FORTY- 
FIVE  PER  WEEK,  it  is  my  judgment  that 
the  proposal  of  the  Publishers  for  an  in- 
crease in  the  hours  of  labor  should  not  be 
granted;  and  it  is  so  decided." 
"Note:     The   caps  are  ours." 

(Continuing   reading   brief:) 

We  respectfully  call  the  attention  of  the  arbi- 
trator to  the  fact  that  the  elimination  of  the 
parenthetical  sentence  "("including  thirty  minutes 
for  lunch)"  would  lengthen  the  working  day  for 
newspaper  printers  one-half  hour  per  day — three 
hours   per   week. 

For  15  or  more  years  the  newspaper  printers 
of  New  York  have  been  working  (actual  time) 
45    hours    per    week. 

At   this   late    day,   when   the   trend   of   all    labor 


is  for  SHORTER  hours,  the  Publishers  submit 
a   proposition   to    LENGTHEN    them. 

At  the  present  time,  as  for  more  than  15 
years,  all  time  per  day  more  than  the  actual 
7i  hours  is  "  overtime."  The  present  scale 
(which  should  be  and  we  trust  will  be  amended 
as  demanded  by  the  Union)  calls  for  price  and 
one-half    for    this    "  overtime." 

Three  hours  overtime  at  the  day  rate — present 
scale — amount  to  $3.21;  night  rate,  $3.51;  lob- 
ster  rate,   $4.05. 

That  is,  to  grant  the  proposition  of  the  pub- 
lishers would  be  a  REDUCTION  of  the  scale 
to  the  extent  of  $3.21  per  week  for  day  work, 
$3.51  for  night  work  and  a  reduction  on  the 
"  lobster  "    shift    by    $4.05. 

It  thus  becomes  obvious  that  to  grant  an  in- 
crease in  the  wage  scale,  as  demanded  by  the 
Union,  and  at  the  same  time  to  grant  the  request 
of  the  publishers  by  eliminating  "(including 
thirty  minutes  for  lunch)"  would  be  equivalent 
to  giving  with  one  hand  and  taking  away  with 
the   other. 

This  same  proposition  came  up  in  proceedings 
before  Bishop  Burgess  in  1903,  again  before  the 
International  Arbitration  Board  in  1907  and  1910, 
and  has  stood  the  acid  test  of  all  these  years.' 
It  was  again  proposed  only  nine  months  ago  in 
arbitration  proceedings  before  the  Hon.  John 
Mitchell. 

No  stronger  argument  against  the  granting  of 
that  demand  of  the  Publishers  need  be  pre- 
sented than  the  decision  of  Arbitrator  Mitchell 
quoted   above. 

Sec.  14.  In  this  section  the  Publishers  de- 
mand the  elimination  of  the  last  three  words  of 
the  fourth  line  and  the  fifth  and  sixth  lines. 

This  same  proposition  was  submitted  by  the 
Publishers   in  the  last  scale  negotiations. 

This  is  nothing  but  an  attempt  on  the  part  of 
the  Publishers  to  inaugurate  a  system  of  three- 
day  situations. 

A  resume  of  the  proceedings  affecting  this  sec- 
tion in  our  negotiations  before  the  Hon.  John 
Mitchell    will    be    enlightening: 

"  In  considering  this  proposed  change  it 
seems  to  me  that  the  Publishers  should  be 
accorded  the  right  to  employ  members  of  the 
Union  to  do  extra  work  for  more  than  one 
day  at  a  time  but  not  for  a  sufficient  num- 
ber of  days  to  interfere  with  the  work  or 
the  opportunities  to  work  of  regular  situa- 
tion holders.  Furthermore,  it  seems  neces- 
sary in  order  to  avoid  favoritism  and  to  allay 
apprehension  that  a  rule  shall  be  adopted  re- 
garding the  employment  of  extra  hands 
which,  while  giving  the  Publishers  reason- 
able latitude,  shall  not  make  favoritism  pos- 
sible. To  that  end  it  is  decided  that  extra 
hands  may  in  one  hiring  be  employed  for  a 
period  not  to  exceed  three  days  in  any  one 
week,  and  it  is  recommended  to  the  Joint 
Conference  Committee  that  a  meeting  be 
held  at  an  early  date  to  draw  an  agreement 
which  shall  embody  this  decision  of  the 
Arbitrator  and  the  suggestion  made  in  con- 
nection therewith.  Should  the  Joint  Confer- 
ence Committee  fail  to  agree  upon  the 
language  of  such  a  section  prior  to  August 
15  the  Arbitrator  will  undertake  to  draft 
a  section,  and  when  it  is  so  drafted  it  will 
become  a  part  of  the  decision  rendered  here- 
with. 

"Mount  Vernon,  N.  Y.,  August  21,  1918. 
"  Mr.    Leon    H.    Rouse,    Presiilent. 

"  New   York  Typographical  Union   No.   6. 
"  Mr.    Don    C.    Seitz,    Chairman,    Committee 
Publishers'    Associaton    of    New    York. 

"  Gentlemen — Under  date  of  August  2d 
the  undersigned  acting  as  arbitrator  ren- 
dered a  decision  in  various  matters  affect- 
ing wages  and  conditions  of  employment  sub- 
mitted to  him  by  the  ncwspa])er  publishers 
and  printers  of  New  York  City.  In  that 
<l(cision  the  arbitrator  requested  the  Publish- 
ers and  Printers  jointly  to  formulate  the 
language  of  Sections  14  and  27  cmb9dying 
the  principles  laid  down  in  the  decision  so 
far  as  they  affected  the  two  sections  in  ques- 
tion, stating  that  if  they  failed  to  agree  he 
himself  would  formulate  the  language  of 
these  two  sections.  Under  date  of  August 
9th     the     arbitrator     received     a     joint     com- 


27 


mnnication  from  tho  Chairmnn  of  the  Pub- 
lishers' Committee  ami  the  I'rcsiiifiit  of  the 
Printers'  Committee  stating  that  at  its  mect- 
injt  the  Joint  Conference  Committee  failed 
to  agree  on  the  lanKuage  of  the  two  sections 
«nd  therefore  resubmits  them  to  the  arbi- 
trator. Upon  receipt  of  this  letter  the  arbi- 
trator invited  the  representatives  of  the  Pub- 
lishers and  the  Printers  to  confer  with  him 
for  the  purpose  of  ascertaining  the  cause  of 
their  disagreement  and  to  aflford  opportunity 
for  the  presentation  of  argument  m  support 
of  their  respective  contentions.  On  Satur- 
day. August  1".  representatives  of  the  Pub- 
lishers and  Printers  conferred  with  the  arbi- 
trator and  submitted  for  his  consideration 
statements  explaining  what  they  understood 
to  be  the  prmciple  laid  down  in  the  arbi- 
trator's   decision. 

"  Sbction   No.    14. 

"  The  Printers  suggest  that  Section  No.  14 
should   read  as   follows: 

"Extras  may  be  put  on  in  machine  offices 
cither  day  or  night  and  may  be  put  on  at 
one  hiring  for  not  to  exceed  three  days  or 
nights  in  any  one  week;  such  extras  to  be 
engaged  in  rotation  from  the  priority  list  in 
each  office.  An  extra  having  worked  three 
nights  or  days  shall  not  be  hired  again  until 
all  others  on  the  priority  list  shall  have 
■worked  three  nights  or  days.  All  extras  shall 
receive  50  cents  additional  to  the  night's  or 
day's   pay." 

The   Publishers  suggest  that  Section  No. 
14  should  read  as  follows: 

"  '  Extras  may  be  put  on  in  machine  offices 
either  day  or  night  and  may  be  put  on  at 
one  hiring  for  not  to  exceed  three  days  or 
nights,  and  shall  receive  50  cents  in  addi- 
tion to  the  regular  scale.' 

"  It  will  be  noted  that  in  the  Arbitrator's 
decision  on  August  2  he  said,  '  In  consider- 
ing this  proposed  change  it  seems  to  me  that 
the  Publishers  should  be  accorded  the  right 
to  employ  members  of  the  Union  to  do  extra 
work  for  more  than  one  day  at  a  time,  BUT 
NOT  FOR  A  SUFFICIENT  NUMBER  OF 
DAYS  TO  INTERFERE  WITH  THE 
WORK  OR  THE  OPPRTUNITIES  TO 
WORK  OF  REGULAR  SITUATION 
HOLDERS;  furthermore,  it  seems  neces- 
sary IN  ORDER  TO  AVOID  FAVORIT- 
ISM and  to  allay  apprehension  that  a  rule 
should  be  adopted  regarding  the  employ- 
ment of  extra  hands  which  while  giving  the 
Publishers  reasonable  latitude  shall  not 
make  favoritism  possible.'  The  arbitrator 
then  decided  '  that  extra  hands  may  in  one 
hiring  be  employed  for  a  period  not  to  ex- 
ceed   three    days    in    any    one    week." 

"  If  the  section  proposed  by  the  Printers, 
as  above  quoted,  were  accepted  by  the  Arbi- 
trator and  incorporated  as  a  part  of  his 
decision  it  would  deprive  the  Publishers  of 
the  greater  latitude  in  the  employment  of 
extra  hands,  which  was  the  basis  of  the  deci- 
sion; it  would  require  the  Publisher  to  select 
in  consecutive  order  extra  hands  from  the 
priority  list  and  to  rotate  this  extra  employ- 
ment in  such  manner  that  no  member  of  the 
Unioi\  could  be  employed  for  more  than 
three  days  Or  nights  until  every  substitute 
on  the  priority  list  had  worktd  for  three  days 
or    three    nights. 

"  On  the  other  hand,  if  the  section  pro- 
posed by  the  Publishers  were  accepted  by 
the  Arbitrator  and  incorporated  as  a  part  of 
his  decision  it  would  give  the  Publishers  an 
unqualified  right  to  employ  as  an  extra  any 
member  of  the  Union  to  work  for  three  con- 
secutive days  or  nights  in  any  one  week,  and 
the  same  member  of  the  Union  could  be 
employed  for  three  consecutive  days  or 
nights  in  the  following  week,  and  this  could 
be  repeated  for  as  many  weeks  as  a  Pub- 
lisher had  extra  work  to  do.  This  is  the 
very  objection  which  the  Arbitrator  had  in 
mind  when  he  recommended  that  '  in  order 
to  avoid  favoritism  and  to  allay  apprehen- 
sion a  rule  should  be  adopted  regarding  the 
employment  of  extra  hands  which  while  giv- 
ing the  Publishers  reasonable  latitude  shall 
not  make  favoritism  possible.' 


"  It  must  be  obvious  from  the  words  em- 
ployed by  the  Arbitrator  in  the  decision  of 
August  2  that  it  was  his  intention  not  to  re- 
strict but  rather  to  extend  the  rights  of  the 
Publishers  in  selecting  extra  hands,  al- 
though, as  stated  in  his  recommendation,  it 
was  the  intention  of  the  Arbitrator  in  ex- 
tending the  rights  of  the  Publishers  so  to 
circumscribe  their  rights  as  to  prevent 
either  favoritism  or  the  appearance  of 
favoritism. 

"  From  the  foregoing  it  will  be  seen  that 
neither  the  section  proposed  by  the  Printers 
nor  that  proposed  by  the  Publishers  con- 
forms to  the  spirit  of  the  decision  of  the 
Arbitrator,  and  therefore  it  is  decided  that 
Section   No.    14   shall   read   as   follows: 

"  '  Section  No.  14.  E.xtras  may  be  put  on 
in  machine  offices  either  day  or  night  and 
may  be  put  on  at  one  hiring  for  not  to  ex- 
ceed three  daj's  or  nights  in  any  one  week, 
but  the  same  extra  may  not  be  so  employed 
in  two  consecutive  weeks  if  others  are  avail- 
able. When  in  accordance  with  the  above 
an  extra  is  hired  for  more  than  one  day  or 
night  he  must,  if  he  fails  to  work  for  the 
period  for  which  he  is  engaged,  supply  a 
substitute.  In  hiring  extras  the  Publishers 
shall  select  such  extras  from  the  priority  list 
(not  necessarily  in  order  of  priority),  if 
extras  from  such  lists  are  available.  Extras 
shall  receive  for  each  day  or  night  50  cents 
in  addition  to  the  regular  scale.' 

(Continuing  reading  brief.) 

"  A  careful  perusal  of  those  proceedings,  virith 
the  accompanying  comments  and  decision  by 
and  of  the  Arbitrator,  must  leave  no  doubt  in 
the  mind  of  the  reader  that  there  was  an  attempt 
on  the  part  of  the  Publishers  to  create  favorit- 
ism with  certain  substitutes;  in  other  words,  to 
create  three-day  situations,  this  being  contrary 
to  all  conventions  of  unionism,  and  absolutely  in 
contravention  to  International  Typographical 
Union    law. 

"  Section  14,  as  at  present  worded,  is  the  sec- 
tion as  handed  down  by  Arbitrator  Mitchell  after 
the  Union  and  the  Publishers  had  failed  to  agree 
upon   the  wording  of  that  section. 

"  This  section,  as  you  will  perceive  in  the 
remarks  of  Mr.  Mitchell,  was  worded  so  as  to 
grant  the  relief  sought  by  the  Publishers  and  at 
the  same  time  be  just  to  the  Union. 

"  And    so    it   has   proved    in   operation. 

"  There  is  no  good  and  just  reason  why  there 
should  be  any  attempt  to  change  this  section  at 
this   time. 

"  This  section  as  it  stands  has  given  the  relief 
sought  by  the  Publishers,  is  just  to  the  members, 
and  has  worked  satisfactorily  since  its  adoption, 
and  for  these  reasons  we  pray  the  Arbitrator  de- 
cide that  the  section  stands  as  at  present. 

"  IN  CONCLUSION,  WE  WISH  TO  IM- 
PRESS UPON  THE  MIND  OF  THE  ARBI- 
TRATOR AND  REITERATE  THE  STATE- 
MENT PREVIOUSLY  SUBMITTED.  THAT 
RATHER  THAN  SUBMIT  TO  THE 
CHANGES  OF  WORKING  CONDITIONS  AS 
OFFERED  BY  THE  PUBLISHERS.  CONDI- 
TIONS EXISTING  IN  THIS  JURISDICTION 
FOR  MORE  THAN  A  QUARTER  OF  A 
CENTURY,  WE  WOULD  STRUGGLE 
ALONG  AS    BEST   WE    MAY." 

(End    of   Brief.) 

Mr.  Rouse — That  concludes  the  argument  of 
the  Union  against  the  propositions  of  the  pub- 
lishers. I  would  like  to  take  up  and  argue  orally, 
as  best  I  can,^  from  the  brief  of  the  publishers. 
On  the  first  page  they  speak  of  "  cost  of  living 
had  reached  almost  the  maximum  of  war  alti- 
tudes." That  is  in  the  fourth  paragraph,  the  last 
few  words.  I  wish  to  call  the  attention  of  the 
Arbitrator  to  the  fact  that  we  have  submitted 
documentary  evidence  today  showing  that^the  al- 
titudes are  still  rising,  and  from  the  time  that 
we  submitted  our  notations  in  regard  to  the  in- 
dex of  the  Annalist,  the  issue  of  last  Monday 
showed  a  further  increase  of  eight  points  within 
that  period  of  less  than  two  weeks.  Undoubted- 
ly the  Annalist  of  next  Monday  will  show  an 
additional   increase. 

Mr.  PoLACHEK — May  I  ask,  how  does  that 
index   number   of   the  Annalist  compare  with  the 


28 


index  number  that  is  shown  on  the  week  of  the 
argument  before  Mr.  Mitchell,  which  would  be 
the  relative  and  proper  comparison,  not  what 
you  might  select  as  an  arbitrary  two  or  three 
weeks  showing  at  the  present  moment.  The 
question  is,  what  was  the  level  on  which  Mr. 
Mitchell  decided  this  increase,  and  what  is  the 
relative    level 'now? 

Mr.  Rouse— I  will  call  to  the  attention  of  the 
Arbitrator,  in  the  proceedings  before  Mr. 
Mitchell,  that  at  the  time  this  decision  was 
rendered 

Mr.  Seitz — Might  I  interject  just  one  inquiry 
here?  Would  the  Union  be  willing  to  establish 
a  floating  scale,  to  be  adjusted  up  and  down  with 
the   cost  of   living? 

Mr.  Rouse — Would  the  Union  be  willing  to 
establish  a  floating  scale  up  and  down?  The 
Union  will  be  willing  to  establish  a  scale  based 
on  what  it  is  rightfully  entitled  to  in  proportion 
to  what  it  produces. 

Mr.  Seitz — That  does  not  answer  the  question. 
You  are  bringing  forward  the  cost  of  living  as 
one  of  the  reasons  why  you  should  receive  more 
money.  My  question  is:  Is  the  Union  willing 
to  take  a  floating  scale  that  will  go  up  and  down 
with  the  cost   of   living? 

Mr.  Rouse — The  Union  is  refuting  arguments 
of  the  Publishers'  Association,  where  they  are 
endeavoring  to  impress  upon  the  Arbitrator's 
mind  that  the  peak  of  the  inflated  cost  has  been 
reached;  and  we  have  produced  documentary 
evidence  to  conclusively  prove  that  that  is  not 
so.  The  Union  has  already  presented  in  argu- 
ment scale  raises  given  to  other  crafts  in  the 
newspaper  trade,  showing  conclusively  that 
where  we  were  the  premier  craft  of  all,  we  are 
now  falling  down  to  almost  the  lowest,  and  wc 
base  our  contention  upon  the  fact  that  we  are 
not  being  adequately  paid  in  proportion  to  what 
we  produce,  in  proportion  to  our  skill,  in  propor- 
tion to  the  strain  upon  us  and  in  proportion  to 
the  intelligence  required  in  order  to  work  at 
the    calling    in    which    we    are    engaged. 

Mr.  Seitz — But,  of  course,  you  know,  Mr. 
Rouse,  that  these  other  scales  were  all  given  on 
the  theory  that  there  had  been  a  war-time  in- 
crease in  the  cost  of  living,  they  were  not  put 
forward  in  accordance  with  the  basis  of  what  was 
produced   or   the   value   of   it. 

Mr.  Rouse — They  were  put  forward  on  a 
basis  of  skill. 

Mr.  Seitz — No,  on  war  costs.  We  have  made 
a  large  number  of  war  bonuses  voluntarily  in  our 
business. 

Mr.  Rouse — Well,  you  have  never  granted  us 
any. 

Mr.  PoLACHEK — The  Annalist  figures  for  that 
period  and  this  period  would  give  the  same  basis 
of  comparison. 

Mr.  Rouse — The  Government  figures  would  do 
just  as  well. 

Mr.  PoLACHEK — No,  because  they  do  not  take 
the  same  twenty-five  articles.  The  Annalist 
makes  a  certain  grouping  and  you  quote  those 
groupings  and  state  percentages. 

Mr.  Wardman — The  comparison  would  not  be 
any  good,  because  you  would  be  comparing  July 
with  March,  if  you  went  back  to  that  period; 
and  of  course  we  know  that  in  certain  seasons 
eggs  are  high  and  in  certain  seasons  eggs  are 
low. 

Mr.  Seitz — It  is  only  fair  to  say  for  the  gen- 
eral information  of  the  Arbitrator,  in  view  cf 
the  turn  the  argument  has  taken,  that  his  Union 
is  now  on  an  equal  or  inferior  basis  to  other 
trades  and  so  forth,  and  that  many  of  our 
raises  were  given  to  people  who  formerly  were 
far  below  the  compositor  in  the  matter  of  earn- 
ing  capacity,    that  that   is   strictly   true. 

Mr.  Rouse — They  are  now  far  above. 

Mr.  Seitz — No,  they  are  not  far  above.  It 
was  demonstrated  plainly  before  the  War  Labor 
Board  and  other  bodies  that  the  costs  had  gone 
up  all  along  the  line,  and  that  a  man  who  had 
been  working  as  a  stevedore,  handling  rolls  of 
paper  for  eighteeYi  dollars  a  week,  would  starve  to 
death  on  that  money,  and  he  was  raised. 
Mr.  Wardman — We  went  into  that. 


Mr.  Seitz — I  am  saying,  in  view  of  the  state- 
ment of  Mr.  Rouse,  that  we  raised  him  in  order 
to  let  him  live,  and  not  according  to  his  superior 
skill.  The  theory  was,  how  much  can  he  live 
upon.  No  argument  was  ever  put  forward  on 
their  behalf  that  they  were  earning  more  money 
or  doing  more  for  the  money,  but  the  question 
was,  can  a  man  live  on  that  amount  of  money? 
It  was  decided  that  a  man  had  to  have  $34.50  a 
week  or  thereabouts  in  order  to  live.  It  was  not 
a  question  of  aristocracy.  It  was  a  question  of 
how   a   man   could   get   along. 

Mr.  Oppenheimer — Our  contention  at  the 
present  time  is  that  we  cannot  maintain  that 
standard  of  living  to  which  we  have  been  accus- 
tomed on  the  present  wages  we  are  getting. 

Mr.  Polachek — Nobody  can  maintain  it.  We 
cannot  do  it,  either. 

Mr.  Wardman — Nor  can  the  Arbitrator. 

Mr.  Oppenheimer — You  cannot  take  as  many 
yacht  trips,  probably,  or  go  to  Florida  as  before. 

Mr.  Rouse — I  would  like  to  ask  Mr.  Seitz  how 
he  dovetails  his  argument  with  the  facts?  He 
said  it  was  not  based  on  skill.  He  says  it  was 
based  on  what  they  were  getting.  How  does  he 
define  this  situation,  that  in  1914  Typographical 
Union  No.  6  was  receiving  thirty  dollars  a  week 
for  day  work,  the  photo-engravers  were  receiving 
twenty-nine  dollars  a  week  for  day  work,  and 
the  Typographical  Union  No.  6  for  night  work 
v/as  receiving  thirty-three  dollars  per  week,  the 
photo-engravers  wer£  receiving  thirty-two  dol- 
lars per  week?  How  does  he  jibe  those  two 
statements?  In  1919  we  find  Typographical 
Union  No.  6  receiving  $34.50  for  day  work. 
We  find  the  photo-engravers,  that  were  a  dollar 
below  us  in  1914,  receiving  $39  per  week.  We 
find  the  printers  for  night  time  receive  $37.50 
per  week,  and  the  photo-engravers  receiving  $42 
per  week  and  working  three  hours  less  than  we 
work.  They  got  three  hours  less  in  that  period, 
and  have  received  approximately  $5.50  more  than 
we  have  received  in  the  same  period,  and  have 
had  three  hours  taken  off  their  workday.  Now, 
the  cost  of  living  hasn't  anything  to  do  with 
that. 

Mr.  Polachek — Yes,  it  has. 

Mr.  Seitz — Yes,  it  has.  That  was  a  War 
Board  decision. 

Mr.  Rouse — That  three-hour  reduction  was  not 
a  War  Board  decision. 

Mr.  Wardman — And  then  they  have  just  sent 
down  another  decision  that  it  may  be  opened  day 
after  tomorrow  by  us  if  we  want  to.  It  is  a 
War  Board  decision,  as  a  war  bonus.  We  are 
talking  scale  now. 

Mr.  Seitz — There  is  another  factor  in  that, 
and  that  is  that  as  high  as  the  wages  of  the 
photo-engravers  are,  and  unjust  as  they  are  to 
the  employer,  they  grow  out  of  a  combination 
made  between  the  photo-engravers'  Union  in 
New-  York  City  and  the  Job  employers,  whereby 
the  job  employers  have  established  a  scale  of 
prices,  and  under  that  scale  of  prices  no  mem- 
ber of  the  photo-engravers  will  work  for  any 
man  who  cuts  it.  In  other  words,  there  has  been 
established  a  photo-engraving  monopoly  in  New 
York  City  between  the  employer  and  cinploj^ee 
against  the  public,  and  as  a  result  of  that,  with 
100  per  cent,  membership,  and  monopolistic  con- 
ditions and  war  emergencies,  they  liave  been 
able  to  force  the  situation.  They  are  a  compar- 
atively small  organization,  and  only  a  few  of 
their   members  are   employed   in   our  ofTices. 

Mr.  Rouse — How  many  in  your  office,  Mr. 
Seitz? 

Mr.  Seitz — I  think  about  twenty;  but  if  such 
a  condition  as  that  were  applied  to  ofi^ices  where 
you  emi)loyed  350  printers,  by  any  chance,  the 
off'iccs  simply  would  be  bankrupt.  When  you 
apply  these  enormous  raises  to  a  vast  nunibcr 
of  employes,  under  your  collective  barg.-tining 
scheme,  the  office  is  ruined.  The  question  is 
how  can  we  support  comfortably  as  large  a  num- 
ber of  people  as  possible,  deal  with  thcin  justly 
and  fairly,  give  them  reasonable  hours,  afid  still 
carry  on   our  business? 

Mr.  Polachek — I  want  to  say,  Mr.  Arbitrator, 
that    in    the   proceedings   before   the   War   Board, 


29 


Mr.  VoU.  the  president  of  the  Union,  brought 
up  the  fact  that  only  about  five  per  cent,  of  their 
mt-nibcrship  were  employed  in  the  newspaper 
otlices;  and  he  cited  the  conditions  which  were 
hrouKht  about  by  this  combination  that  Mr. 
Sciiz  is  speaking  about,  and  cited  as  one  of  the 
reasons    why    the    newspaper 

Mr.  Seitz — We  are  forbidden  to  do  any  out- 
side work  in  our  office,  under  this  monopoly. 

Mr.   Rouse — Not  by  us?     Why  penalize  us? 

Mr.  Seitz — You  endeavored  to  do  it  until  you 
lost  the  arbitration;  you  endeavored  to  exclude 
outside  work  from  our  office  by  establishing  im- 
possible   conditions. 

Mr.  RovsE — Not  at  all. 

Mr.  Wardman — Are  we  not  agreed  on  this 
point,  that  all  these  other  scales  that  have  been 
for  the  moment  thrown  beyond  yours,  are  war 
bonuses? 

Mr.  Oppenheimer — No,  the  photo-engravers 
have  a  scale  contract  with  you. 

Mr.  Wardman — The  photo-engravers'  scale 
contract  with  us  is  seven  dollars  a  week  below 
what  they  are  getting;  the  seven  dollars  a  week 
war  bonus  is  an  award  by  the  War  Labor 
Board 

Mr.  Rouse — I  beg  to  differ  with  you.  In  1917 
you   gave   the   photo-engravers    four   dollars. 

Mr.   Wardman — That  is  right. 

Mr.  Rouse — In  1917,  you  reduced  the  hours 
of   the   photo   engravers   three   hours   every   week. 

Mr.  Wardman — That  is  right.  We  are  talk- 
ing now  about  what  they  are  getting  at  this 
minute. 

Mr.  PoLACHEK — Their  money  contract  is 
thirty-three    dollars    a    week. 

Mr.  Wardman — And  they  are  getting  a  war 
bonus,  that  just  yesterday  the  War  Labor  Board 
advised  us  we  could  open  to-morrow  if  we 
wanted  to. 

Mr.  Rouse — Their  contract  for  night  work 
under  the  scale  of  1917,  leaving  out  the  ques- 
tion of  the  six  dollars  that  they  got  from  the 
War  Labor  Board — in  that  War  Labor  Board 
decision  which  I  have  here  there  is  nothing 
that  gives   you  the   right   to   open    it   at   will. 

Mr.   Wardman — It   says  so. 

Mr.  Rouse — I  can  produce  it,  if  you  want  me 
to. 

Mr.  Seitz — What  I  want  to  make  clear,  Mr. 
Arbitrator,  is  this:  we  had,  and  still  have,  a 
contract  with  the  Photo-Engravers  Union,  and 
a  wage  scale,  far  below  the  figure  that  Mr. 
Rouse  quoted  as  the  outside  figure.  The  Photo- 
Engravers  Union,  feeling  its  oats  under  this 
arbitrary  agreement  that  was  made  with  the  em- 
ployes and  following  the  example  of  the  press- 
men and  feeders,  who  broke  their  agreement 
with  the  employers  and  practically  struck  upon 
them  and  forced  an  -increase  in  scale  at  the 
time  every  office  in  town  was  doing  Liberty  Bond 
business  and  Red  Cross  business,  came  forward 
with  a  demand  that  we  waive  the  contract  for 
the  time  and  establish  a  higher  figure,  al- 
though it  had  this  year  and  a  half  yet  to  run. 
The  employers  agreed  to  it,  because  at  the  same 
time  the  Union  brought  forward  a  new  scale  of 
prices  to  the  public,  which  gave  the  employers 
still  a  larger  increment  than  they  had  been  re- 
ceiving before,  and  out  of  that  large  increment 
which  they  exacted  from  the  consumer,  they 
cheerfully  raised  the  figure.  Then  the  Unions 
came  around  to  our  offices  and  said  "In  view 
of  the  fact  that  the  employers  have  done  this 
thing,  you  are  to  do  it  in  order  to  keep  your 
men,  otherwise  you  will  find  yourselves  with- 
out workmen."  It  was  not  treated  very  seriously 
by  the  offices  until  in  the  case  of  the  Brooklyn 
Daily  Eagle  their  men  faded  out,  and  didn't 
come  back  to  work  at  all.  They  called  a  meet- 
ing of  the  photo  engravers  and  demanded,  flat 
footed,  that  they  fill  that  office  under  the  con- 
tract; and  they  wrangled  around  a  while,  and 
when  their  position  was  shown  to  be  untenable, 
they  did  as  we  wished.  They  sent  a  circular 
around  advising  the  men  to  fade  out  unless  the 
employers  could  see  a  light.  Finally,  as  a  result 
of  the  grievances,   and  believing  that  the  condi- 


tions could  be  fairly  presented  to  the  War 
Labor  Board,  our  Committee  did  agree  to  have 
war  conditions  as  to  the  cost  of  living  deter- 
mined anew  in  the  face  of  this  contract,  and 
tor  a  war  period  only;  because  there  could  have 
been  no  other  reason  for  the  action  in  our  case. 
Our  contract  was  signed,  sealed  and  delivered, 
and  had  this  long  period  to  endure. 

Whereupon,  a  hearing  was  held  and  the  War 
Labor  Board  made  this  arbitrary  decision  based 
upon  what  they  called  "Continued  war  condi- 
tions," and  added  the  successive  sum.  That  is 
the  whole  fact  about  the  photo  engravers  and 
our   dealings.     Is   it   not,   Mr.    Polachek? 

Mr.  Polachek — Yes. 

Mr.  Morrison — What  understanding  have  you 
in  regard  to  the  termination  of  this  award  made 
by  the  War  Labor  Board? 

Mr.  Polachek — We  took  that  up  with  the 
War  Labor  Board,  Mr.  Arbitrator,  and  we  got 
a  reply  that  the  proposition  was  open  to  action 
by  the  publishers  at  any  time  through  the  Com- 
mittee. That  was  exactly  the  purport  of  it.  We 
made  the  contention  in  our  answer  to  the  W^ar 
Labor  Board's  ruling,  that  they  should  make  a 
definite  period  for  this,  and  they  came  back 
with  the  proposition  that  that  was  not  neces- 
sary, that  the  ruling  was  complete  as  it  stood, 
and  it  was  subject  to  action  by  the  publishers 
at  any  time. 

Mr.  Seitz — It  stands  to  reason  that  no  ruling 
of  the  War  Labor  Board  could  break  our  con- 
tract with  them,  except  that  we  voluntarily  went 
into  agreement  with  the  War  Labor  Board  to 
abide  by  it  to  the  exent  at  which  they  set  it 
forth. 

Mr.  RousE-;-But  is  it  not  a  fact  that  the  Pub- 
lishers'   Association    appealed   this   decision? 

Mr.   Seitz — It  is  a  fact. 

Mr.  Rouse — Is  it  not  a  fact  that  the  first  sec- 
tion in  that  appeal  contained  the  statement  that 
the  decision  was  defective,  in  that  it  had  no 
termination   clause? 

Mr.    Wardman — Yes. 

Mr.  Rouse — Is  it  not  a  fact  that  the  War 
Labor    Board    denied   the    Publishers   appeal? 

Mr.  Wardman — No,  they  declined  to  deter- 
mine it,  because  they  said  it  could  be  opened, 
and    that   answered   our   question. 

Mr.  Rouse — They  said  it  could  be  opened,  yes, 
by   mutual   consent. 

Mr.  Polachek — I  will  send  down  and  get  a 
copy  of  the   ruling. 

Mr.    RousE — You 
parties   agree   to   it. 

Mr.  Morrison — I  was  just  wondering  if  the 
decision  of  the  War  Labor  Board,  having  been 
rendered,  the  Publishers  having  submitted  to 
the  War  Labor  Board  for  decision,  whether 
that  decision  would  remain  in  effect  until  such 
time  as  your  regular  contract  expired  with  the 
Union. 

Mr.  Polachek— -That  is  what  we  asked. 

Mr.  Wardman — We  tried  to  find  that  out. 
That  was  our  question;  it  was  a  blind  decision. 
It  awards  six  dollars,   I  think,  does  it  not? 

Mr.    Rouse — Six   dollars   is   correct. 

Mr.  Wardman — We  wanted  to  know  what  it 
meant.  Was  it  six  dollars  on  everybody  or  was 
it  six  dollars  on  the  scale?  Did  it  run  until 
eternity  or  did  it  run  until  the  end  of  the  war, 
or  did  it  run  until  when?  Then  we  asked  them 
to  determine  it,  among  other  things.  They  refused 
to  determine  it,  because  they  said  the  thing 
was  self  _  explanatory,  that  it  was  an  award  by 
the  waiving  of  mutual  claims,  or  something  like 
that,   and  could  be   reopened. 

Mr.  Rouse — Reopened  how?  By  the  same 
procedure  that  you  followed  to  get  it.  You 
went  in  by  joint  submission.  To  reopen  it  again, 
you  would  have  to  have  joint  submission.  That 
six  dollars  stands  until  the  end  of  the  contract, 
unless  you  reopen  it  by  joint  submission. 

Mr.  Wardman — It  stands  there  until  eternity, 
then,  I  suppose. 

Mr.  Seitz — I  quoted  it  for  the  reason  that  I 
wanted   to   prove   my   precise    point,    that   it   was 


can't    open    it    unless    both 


30 


an  award  made  in  view  of  war  conditions,  and 
is  not  a  scale  in  the  sense  that  we  are  trying 
to  make  one  here.  The  Union  is  asking  for  in- 
creased wages  on  the  ground  that  they  earn 
more  money  for  good  work,  or  that  the  cost 
of  living  has  gone  up.  Would  Mr.  Rouse  be 
willing  to  make  a  floating  scale,  up  or  down,  to 
be  varied  with  the  cost  of  living.  That  is  what 
I  asked  Mr.  Rouse  and  he  has  not  answered 
it. 

Mr.  Oppenheimer — No  sane  man  would  make 
a  contract  of   that  kind. 

Mr.  Rouse — We  have  presented  a  strong  brief 
here  this  morning  defining  our  position  very 
precisely.  Just  briefly  I  will  summarize  it.  We 
make  the  contention  before  this  Arbitrator,  that 
we  have  never  been  adequately  paid  in  propor- 
tion to  the  skill  required  and  the  strain  upon 
us  in  the  work  we  are  performing.  We  make 
the  claim  that  in  proportion  to  the  increases 
granted  to  other  trades,  we  have  not  been  fairly 
dealt  with  by  the  publishers,  and  we  have  gone 
into  it  very  extensively.  We  have  cited  a  num- 
ber of  exhibits,  that  our  contention  is  based  on 
the  cost  of  living,  on  the  skill  required,  on  the 
wage  increase  granted  to  others  and  what  the 
others  generally  are  receiving  throughout  the 
country,  and  that  our  increase  has  not  been  in 
proportion   to   others. 

Mr.  Seitz — But  that  ought  not  to  shut  off 
my  question,  because  you  yourself  say  you  have 
included  the  cost  of  living  as  one  of  your  rea- 
sons. Are  you  willing  to  let  the  cost  of  living 
be  a  floating  factor? 

Mr.  Rouse — I  am  willing  to  allow  the  Arbi- 
trator to  determine  the  issues  on  the  evidence 
presented. 

Mr.  Wardman — Three  times  we  have  volun- 
tarily raised  these  low  priced  men  we  have  told 
you  about,  the  hostlers  and  drivers  and  men  like 
that. 

Mr.  Rouse — I  have  not  submitted  those,  Mr. 
Wardman. 

Mr.  Oppenheimer — We  include  only  the  pa- 
per  handlers. 

Mr.  Wardman — Or  the  paper  handlers;  and 
it  was  distinctly  stated  in  the  agreement  that 
we  made  with  them,  that  that  war  increase  we 
gave  them  was  for  the  official  end  of  the  war. 

Mr.  Oppenheimer — I  wish  to  add,  that 
though  the  war  may  be  over — we  do  not  admit 
it  is  over,  but  for  the  sake  of  argument  we 
will  admit  it — that  war  conditions  still  prevail, 
which  I  do  not  think  anybody  will  deny.  The 
war  may  be  over,  but  the  conditions  are  still 
here. 

Mr.  Seitz — Which  goe»  right  back  to  my 
question.  Are  you  willing  to  make  a  scale  that 
will  be  floating,  that  will  go  up  and  down  with 
war   conditions? 

Mr.  Oppenheimer — As  one  member  of  the 
Committee  I  will  say  no,  we  certainly  will  not 
make   a  floating  scale. 

Mr.  Douglas— If  Mr.  Seitz  will  reframe  the 
question  and  ask  if  we  will  make  the  scale  on 
a  stabilized  dollar,  then  we  will  answer  the 
question. 

Mr.  Rouse — If  Mr.  Seitz»  will  concede  to  us 
the  79  per  cent,  advance  in  the  cost  of  living, 
I  will  answer  the  question.  If  he  wants  to 
gamble,  I  will  gamble;  if  he  wants  to  grant  the 
79  per  cent,  increase  to  us,  I  will  take  a  chance. 

Mr.  Wardman — There  is  another  place  where 
you  cannot  be  serious.  The  79  per  cent,  in- 
crease in  the  cost  of  living  does  not  mean  that 
your  dollar  has  depreciated  accordingly  on 
everything.  It  pays  the  same  number  of  street 
car  fares  as  it  ever  did. 

Mr.  Rouse — Not  in  New  Jersey. 

Mr.  Wardman — And  it  pays  the  same  num- 
ber of  dues  as  it  always  did. 

Mr.    Rouse — No,   it  does   not. 

Mr.  Wardman — -And  it  pays  the  same  amount 
of  insurance  as  it  always  did. 

Mr.  Rouse — No.  There  is  only  one  thing  I 
will  concede  to  you,  Mr.  Wardman;  I  will  con- 
cede that  on  July  Ist  it  won't  buy  as  much  to 
drink   as   it   formerly   did. 


Mr.  Wardman— That  will  be  a  good  thing  for 
all    of    us. 

Mr.  Polachek — I  will  read  to  you  from  this 
copy  of  the  report  of  the  War  Labor  Board.  This 
is  the  answer  to  the  proposition  of  the  photo 
engravers  on  the  appeal  of  the  Publishers  for 
definition   and   rehearing  on  this   verdict: 

"  We  find  the  claim  that  no  provision  has 
been  made  for  the  reopening  of  the  wage 
rates  determined  in  this  award  is  not  well 
founded,  in  that  the  agreement  between  the 
parties  under  the  caption  of  '  Standing 
Committees  '  provides  a  method  for  the  ad- 
justment of  any  and  all  matters  of  dispute 
or  differences  that  may  arise.  This  provi- 
sion offsets  the  necessity  for  any  further 
provision  in  this  regard." 
In  other  words,  that  it  is  not  a  final  and 
definite  conclusion  for  the  period. 

Mr.  Oppenheimer — According  to  what  you 
have  read,  you  have  no  answer  yet.  He  does 
not  tell  you  how  to  reopen   it. 

Mr.   Polachek — Yes,   he   does   tell   you   how. 
Mr.    Douglas — Is    it   not   a    fact   that    you    can- 
not   take    a    case    before    the    War    Labor    Board 
unless   by    joint    submission? 

Mr.    Polachek — Exactly. 

Mr.  Douglas — Now,  to  get  this  case  reopened, 
you  would  have  to  get  the  signatures  of  the 
photo  engravers,  along  with  your  own,  to  ask 
the   War   Labor   Board   to   reopen   it. 

Mr.  Polachek — Just  exactly  as  they  got  ours 
when    they    went. 

Mr.  Seitz — Mr.  Douglas'  statement  shows 
exactly  the  difficutly  we  are  always  against  in 
dealing  with  the  Union.  With  their  desire  to  be 
fair,  and  with  our  desire  to  be  fair  and  liberal 
with  them,  they  come  before  you  and  they  say 
to  you,  "  The  Publishers  want  something."  They 
also  say  they  want  everything  and  they  give 
nothing.  Mr.  Rouse  has  stated  to  you  that  they 
want  to  be  paid  in  proportion  to  their  skill  and 
their  output.  They  have  not  brought  any  evi- 
dence here  to  show  any  increase  in  their  skill 
and  output. 

Mr.  Oppenheimer — Yes,  the  introduction  of 
machinery. 

Mr.  Seitz — But  you  did  not  introduce  the 
machinery.      We    introduced    the    machinery. 

Mr.  Oppenheimer — But  we  submitted  evidence 
concerning    it. 

Mr.  Rouse — I  wish  to  call  the  attention  of 
the  Arbitrator  to  the  original  decision  of  the 
War   Labor  Board. 

Mr.  Polachek — It  is  that  on  which  we  asked 
elucidation,    and    we    just    showed    the    reply. 

Mr.  Rouse — Again  I  wish  to  call  attention  to 
the  original  decision;  you  will  find  it  does  not 
specify  that  there  is  any  war  bonus,  that  it  is 
for  the  duration  of  the  war,  or  for  anything 
other  than  what  it  says — a  six  dollar  increase, 
which  can  only  be  changed  by  joint  submission. 
I  call  attention  to  the  exhibit  submitted  by  the 
Publishers,  and  also  call  particular  attention  to 
the  decision  in  full,  which  does  not  say  that 
it    is    a    war    bonus: 

NATIONAL    WAR    LABOR    BOARD 

Docket    No.    892, 

Award  t»i   re  New   York   Photo  Engravers' 

Union   No.   1. 

versus 

Publishers'  Association  of  New  York  City. 

This  case  comes  before  the  National  War 
Labor  Board  by  joint  sul)niission.  The 
parties  expressly  waived  all  provisions  of 
their  contract  relating  to  arbitration  of 
differences  relative  to  wages,  and  authorized 
the  National  War  Labor  Board  to  determine 
the  question  of  wages  in  dispute. 
L     Wages — 

The   wages   of   all   members  of   New   York 
Photo  Engravers'  Union  No.   1,  I.   P.  E.  U,, 


31 


shall     be     incrcascil     six     dollars     C$6)     per 
week   over   the   scale   rates   in    effect,    tins    in- 
crease  to   be   effective   as   of    November    20lh, 
1918. 
2.   Adtninistralipn — 

Should  any  ditTerenccs  arise  relative  to  the 
application  and  interpretation  of  the  terms 
of  this  award,  upon  the  request  of  cither 
party  the  Secretary  of  the  National  War 
Labor  Board  may  appoint  an  administrator 
to  supervise  the  application  thereof.  The 
administrator  shall  hear  the  parties  and  shall 
promptly  render  his  decision,  from  which 
an  appeal  may  be  taken  to  the  National  War 
Labor  Boanl. 

Fred    Hewitt. 
Joseph      W.     Marsh, 

Section   22. 
March    12,    1919. 
Approved   by   the   Board. 
(Signed)     W.    Jett    Lauck, 

Secretary. 
Mr.  Seitz — I  must  take  exception  to  Mr. 
Rouse's  statement  that  there  is  not  a  war  bonus 
in  it.  How  did  it  get  there?  I  have  to  make 
clear  again,  as  I  think  I  have  already,  that  it 
got  there  on  a  contention  on  the  part  of  the 
Union  that  they  require  further  advances,  owing 
to  the  cost  of  living  during  the  period  of  the 
war.  What  I  asked  you  was  whether  or  not 
you  would  be  willing  to  establish  a  f.oating  scale, 
up   or   down. 

Mr.  Rouse — And  I  answered  you  no. 
Mr.  Douglas — The  individual  cost  of  living 
is  just  the  same,  it  costs  us  as  much  to  live  as 
it  does  the  photo  engraving  men.  What  differ- 
ence does  it  make  whether  there  are  ten  thousand 
men  in  the  Union  or  whether  there  are  only  a 
thousand? 

Mr.  Seitz — It  makes  this  difference,  that  a 
newspaper  selling  its  product  at  a  fixed  price 
has  a  certain  sum  of  money  to  draw  from,  and 
if  its  earnings  are  to  be  confiscated  by  arbitrary 
decisions,  there  is  nothing  for  it  to  do  but  to 
go   out- of  business. 

Mr.  Douglas — Nobody  confiscates  it.  It  is  a 
question  of  when  the  publishers  say  that  they 
now  receive  so  much  and  can  afford  to  pay  so 
much;  and  the  Union  says  that  the  men  cannot 
live  unless  they  get  so  much,  when  they  cannot 
get  together,  to  go  to  someone  and  ask  what  is 
the  proper  wage  for  a  man  to  have  to  live  upon. 
Mr.  Seitz — If  you  are  willing  to  rest  on  that 
point,  we  have  nothing  to  say;  but  you  don't  want 
to   rest  on  that  point. 

Mr.  Douglas — If  you  people  are  not  making 
enough  money  out  of  your  newspapers  to  pay 
this  living  wage  to  our  members,  that  is  up  to 
you;  that  is  not  up  to  the   Union. 

Mr.  Rouse — We  have  called  the  attention  of 
the  Arbitrator  to  the  fact  that  in  all  probability 
there  will  be  another  increase  in  the  cost  of 
newspapers  to  the  general  public. 

Mr.  Polachek — That  is  an  unwarranted  state- 
ment. He  does  not  know  what  he  is  talking 
about,   Mr.   Arbitrator. 

Mr.    Oppenheimer — We    have    the    evidence. 

Mr.  Rouse — I  read  from  the  New  York  Herald 
of  Saturday,  April  Sth,  1919,  an  editorial  as 
follows: 

"  The  increased  cost  of  production  of 
many  of  the  things  which  are  indispensable 
to  the  happiness,  well  being  and  instruction 
of  the  public  is  as  grave  a  problem  as  the 
increased  cost  of  living.  The  war  is  largely 
responsible,  of  course,  for  it  has  taken  large 
numbers  of  men  from  their  ordinary  voca- 
tions and  has  generally  dislocated  production 
and  employment,  and  these  are  slow  in 
reverting  to  normal  or  pre-war  conditions. 
Few  branches  of  industry  have  suffered 
more  in  recent  years  than  the  publishing 
trade,  with  which  the  production  of  news- 
papers '  is  most  concerned.  The  diminished 
supplies  of  pulp,  due  to  the  war  draft  upon 


the  sturdy  manhood  engaged  in  the  spruce 
forests  and  mills,  naturally  led  to  a  large 
increase  in  the  price  of  printing  paper.  There 
may  be  a  reduction  to  the  normal  in  the 
cost  of  paper  by  and  by,  but  the  time  for 
this  has  not  yet  come,  at  least  so  say  the 
print     paper     manufacturers. 

"  .\t  the  same  time  the  cost  of  printing 
machinery  has  vastly  incrcased.anil  there  are 
no  indications  of  an  early  reversion  to  pre- 
war prices;  in  fact,  they  would  appear  to 
be  rising  rather  than  falling.  Finally  comes 
the  question  of  wages,  which  have  been 
vastly  enhanced  as  the  result  of  the  in- 
creased cost  of  living,  and  as  to  which 
there  are  few  hopes  of  reduction,  owing  to 
the  incessant  and  increasing  demands  of  a 
starving  Europe,  as  well  as  the  diffculty  of 
lowering  wages  once  they  are  raised.  Mate- 
rials of  all  kinds  connected  with  the  printing 
and  publishing  industry  are  rising  rather 
than  falling,  and  the  burden  has  been  mainly 
upon    the    shoulders   of   the    publishers. 

"  The  increase  last  year  in  the  cost  of 
the  newspaper  to  the  public  brought  the 
publishers  comparatively  little  relief,  and  it 
is  becoming  clear  that  unless  a  halt  is  called 
in  the  cost  of  material  and  labor,  yet 
another  increase  will  be  unavoidable,  and 
that  instead  of  two  cents  the  public  might 
be  called  upon  to  pay  five  cents  for  their 
daily  paper  and  ten  cents  for  the  Sunday 
edition,  with  a  further  increased  price  out- 
side the  city,  owing  to  the  heavily  augmented 
cost    of    delivery. 

"  The  newspaper  reading  public  may  be 
sure  that  such  increases  will  not  be  resorted 
to  except  under  the  gravest  necessity.  The 
change  of  price  is  one  which  the  publishers 
would  do  everything  in  their  power  to  avert. 
But  the  publisher  cannot  go  on  paying  the 
toll,  and  eventually  the  public  will  have 
to  pay." 
(The  above  editorial  was  marked  "  Exhibit 
O.") 

Mr.  Morrison — There  is  no  question  but  that 
w'e  are  in  a  period  of  readjustment  as  to  condi- 
tions that  are  existing  at  the  present  time;  and 
it  would  be  natural,  if  there  is  an  increase  in 
wages  made  by  the  publishers,  that  they  would 
be  compelled  to  raise  the  prices  of  the  newspa- 
pers and  their  advertisements  to  meet  that  in- 
crease. 

Mr.  Seitz — Then  if  the  public  were  unable 
to   pay   that,   what   would   happen? 

Mr.  Rouse — You  have  a  monopoly,  what  can 
they    do? 

Mr.  Morrison — They  will  say,  as  you  say  to 
the  Printers,  that  the  advertisers  will  condemn 
the  papers  for   charging  higher   rates. 

Mr.  Seitz — They  will  do  more  than  that.  They 
will   pull  out  their  ads. 

Mr.  Oppenheimer — In  what  paper  will  they 
publish  their  ads  then? 

Mr.  Wardman — What  they  will  do  is  what 
they  are  doing  now  in  the  steel  and  coppei 
business,  they  will  stop  buying;  then  we  will  all 
be   out  of  business. 

Mr.  Seitz — Like  in  the  building  business, 
building  is  at  a  standstill,  the  cost  of  labor  con- 
tinues, reflected  in  the  cost  of  material  and  in 
building  buildings,  and  it  has  become  so  extor- 
tionate that  the  builder  cannot  build,  he  cannot 
build  in  competition  with  the  existing  buildings, 
which    are    perpetual    competitors. 

Mr.  Morrison — Mr.  Seitz,  you  have  had  some 
experience  in  regard  to  this:  Is  it  not  true  that 
the  men  that  have  buildings  that  they  had  erected 
years  ago  at  a  low  rate,  are  charging  rates  just 
as  much   as  they   can  get? 

Mr.  Wardman — That  is  true  with  some  excep- 
tions. 

Mr.  Seitz — Only  to  a  very  limited  extent.  We 
have  investigated  it,  and  what  we  have  found 
out  is  that  in  many  parts  of  New  York  City, 
particularly  Washington  Heights  and  The 
Bronx,  after  the  subways  were  opened,  there 
was    a    great    rush    of    speculative    business,    and 


32 


men  rented  buildings  at  extremely  low  rates, 
far  below  prices  anywhere  else  in  the  city,  be- 
cause population  had  not  caught  up  with  them, 
and  they  had  to  get  something  to  keep  going;  and 
we  have  found,  only  in  a  few  instances,  what  might 
be  called  vicious  and  profiteering  raises,  that  in 
nearly  all  the  cases  the  rates  are  not  above  those 
in  the  old  established  sections  where  rents  have 
been  stabilized  for  years.  Of  course  you  have 
got  to  remember  that  during  the  first  two  years 
of   the    war    things    were   very    stagnant    here. 

Mr.  Rouse — Kefore  I  was  interrupted,  I  was 
stating  to  the  Arbitrator  that  they  were  framing 
the  public  mind  up  to  an  increase  in  rates.  I 
stated  in  1918  to  the  publishers  that  in  every 
avenue  our  dollar  was  depreciating,  and  that  if 
we  could  not  get  this  difference  out  of  the  in- 
dustry the  industry  would  have  to  raise  its  price 
in  order  to  pay  us  a  proportionate  wage  so  that 
we  could  go  on.  We  were  then  called  brigands 
and  so  forth;  but  immediately  we  got  two  dollars 
increase,  the  Publishers  Association  held  a  meet- 
ing and  the  price  of  the  paper  went  up  to  two 
cents. 

Mr    Seitz — That    was    not    the    cause    of    it. 

Mr.  PoLACHEK — It  went  up  to  two  cents  after 
the  War  Trade  Board  sent  a  representative  up 
here   and   asked   us   to   put   it   up. 

Mr.  Seitz — I  will  explain  that;  it  was  because 
the  cost  of  white  paper  more  than  doubled;  and 
I  can  say  for  the  Arbitrator's  information  that 
the  newspapers  in  New  York  City — I  do  not 
know  how  it  is  in  other  parts  of  the  country 
— are  not  as  well  off  on  the  two-cent  basis  as 
they   were   on   the   one-cent   basis. 

Mr.  Rouse — That  is  another  thought  that  you 
can  take  away  with  you  as  supporting  the  con- 
tention of  the  Herald  that  there  is  a  contem- 
plated movement  upward  in  the  cost  of  the 
selling   price   of   the  Herald. 

Mr.  Seitz — Mr.  Rouse's  argument  is  this:  that 
the  Arbitrator  shall  award  a  liberal  increase  of 
pay  in  order  that  we  may  be  forced  to  carry 
out    our    anticipations. 

Mr.   Rouse — I   agree   with  you. 

Mr.  Wardman — I  think  that  is  an  unfortunate 
word  of  yours,  "  contemplated." 

Mr.  RousE^I  can  only  take  what  I  read  in 
the    papers. 

Mr.  Wardman — There  is  a  desire  on  my  part 
to  do  it  and  there  has  been  right  along;  I  have 
been  urging  a  further  increase,  but  there  is  a 
stone  wall  that  I  keep  running  up  against,  in 
the  papers  that  won't  do  it,  and  I  cannot  do  it 
until  they  do.  You  cannot  say  it  is  a  contem- 
plated  movement. 

Mr.  PoLACHEK — It  cannot  be  done  until  all 
the  papers  agree. 

Mr.  Wardman — There  are  certain  papers  that 
are   afraid   to   do    it. 

Mr.  Rouse — Just  going  back  again  to  some  of 
the  statements  that  have  been  made  this  after- 
noon, relative  to  the  photo-engravers.  Mr.  Seitz 
made  the  statement  that  this  difference  brought 
about  in  the  photo-engraving  industry  was  be- 
cause there  was  a  combination  between  the  photo- 
engravers  and  the  employers.  You  can  see  this 
combination  that  exists  on  the  employers'  side, 
that  they  are  educating  one  another  to  the  point 
as  to  whether  they  arc  going  to  put  on  this 
impost  and  they  will  soon  have  sufficient  con- 
verts to   do   it. 

Mr.  Seitz — But  you  forget  that  you  are  the 
missionary. 

Mr.  Rouse — The  newspapers  in  this  town  have 
an  absolute  monopoly  of  the  situation.  When  it 
comes  right  down  to  talking  about  poor  down- 
trodden working  people  forming  a  combination 
in  restraint  of  trade,  they  are  mere  pikers  in 
comparison   with  the   Associated   Press. 

Mr.  Wardman — The  two  strongest  newspapers 
in    the    field    are    not    in    the    Associated    Press. 

Mr.  Rouse — As  compared  to  the  lily,  the 
printers  are  pikers  when  it  comes  to  the  Pub- 
lishers Association,  for  purity.  Now,  if  I  may 
be   permitted   to   proceed. 

Mr.  Seitz — I  might  say  that  Mr.  Rouse  and 
I  have  been  associated  together  for  twenty 
years. 


Mr.  Morrison — Under  those  circumstances, 
Mr.    Rouse,   you   may   be   permitted   to   go   on. 

Mr.  Rouse — I  am  reading  from  their  brief 
again : 

"  We  call  to  the  attention  of  the  Arbi- 
trator, the  fact  that  in  this  very  recent  ar- 
bitration the  Judge  had  before  him  all  of  the 
problems  in  the  cost  of  living  which  it  was 
possible  to  advance  and  all  that  could  be 
set  up  today  in  the  same  case,  and  he  had 
confronting  him  the  problem  of  the  continu- 
ation of  the  war  which  does  not  confront 
the  arbitrator  in  the  present  instance,  and 
he  had  before  him  the  possibility  of  a  con- 
stantly increasing  cost  of  living  due  to  the 
war  which  has  been  converted  into  a  proba- 
bility of  a  steadily  increasing  cost  of  living 
in  view  of  the  ending  of  the  war.  This  is  a 
situation  that  confronts  the  judge  in  the 
present  proceedings." 
I  wish  to  call  the  attention  of  the  Arbitrator 
to  page  12  of  the  former  proceedings: 

"  On    page    94,   monthly   revue   of  the   Bu- 
reau of  Labor   Statistics,  May,  1918,  we  find 
the  following:    'Food  as  a  whole  was  59  per 
cent,  higher  in  March,  1918,  than  in  the  same 
month  in  1913.'  " 
I  wish  to  call  to  the  attention  of  the  Arbitrator 
the    fact   that   when   we   presented  our   case   then, 
according  to   the   Bureau   of   Labor   Statistics,  the 
percentage   was   59   per  cent. 

I  also  call  to  your  attention  now,  in  the  bul- 
letin submitted  to  you,  that  the  cost  of  living 
is  79  per  cent.,  an  increase  of  20  points,  ac- 
cording to  the  Department  of  Labor.  That  is 
between  the  period  the  former  arbitration  was 
conducted  and  the  present  time,  a  difference 
between  59  per  cent,  and  79  per  cent,  and  still 
going. 

Mr.  PoLACHEK — Your  comparison  was  between 
1914  and  now.     The  comparison  is  not  the  same. 

Mr.  Rouse — No,  it  has  gone  up  twenty  points 
in  that  period,  and  is  still  going,  according  to 
the  chart  of  the  Annalist. 

I  submit  this  record  of  the  last  arbitration  as 
an  exhibit. 

(Marked   Exhibit   P.) 

Mr.  Rouse — Now  we  come  to  the  table  that 
has  been  prepared,  and  they  have  submitted  the 
Publishers'  Bulletin  of  January.  I  do  not  place 
much  importance  to  that,  and  I  do  not  think 
the  Arbitrator  should,  because  I  have  the  figures 
here  of  the  very  recent  scale  increases;  and, 
according  to  Mr.  Polachek's  own  statement  his 
figures  are  not  the  most  recent.  For  instance, 
he  has  Boston,  day  scale  $28.56  and  $30.24  for 
night,  48  hour  week.  Now,  Mr.  Polachek  knows 
different   from   that. 

Mr.    Polachek — No,  I   do   not. 

Mr.  Rouse — Yes,  you  do,  because  you  know 
that  the  New  York  American  is  located  in 
Boston,  and  you  know  that  they  have  recently 
had  an  arl)itration  award  in  Boston,  which  has 
given    those    men    an    $8.40    increase. 

Mr.  Polachek — I  have  not  had  a  chance  to 
scour  the  country  for  exceptions  at  all.  I  took 
this  as  our  official  bulletin  (referring  to  Pub- 
lishers'   Exhibit    A). 

Mr.  Morrison — I  would  suggest  that  the  state- 
ment you  have  there  be  submitted  as  an   cxliibit. 

Mr.  Wardman — Put  it  in  the  record,  Mr. 
Rouse. 

Mr.  Rouse — I  would  like  to  ask  Mr.  Polachek 
a  fair  (|uestion:  Do  you  mean  to  tell  nic  that 
you  arc  willing  to  state  before  this  body  here 
today  that  you  did  not  know  that  the  scale  in 
Boston  h.id  been  increased,  and  that  the  figures 
were   as    I    have    stated    them  ? 

Mr.  Polachek — Absolutely  1  did  not  know 
it,  because  I  have  not  been  in  touch  with  tlic 
Boston  office,  and  I  do  not  know  what  they 
have  been  domg. 

Mr.  Rouse — You  mean  to  tell  me  that  I  never 
informed  you  what  it  was? 

Mr.    Polachek — I   do   not  recall   it. 

Mr.  Wardman — You  informed  me,  I  remember 
that. 

Mr.  Rouse — I  submit  also,  and  call  the  atten- 
tion of  the  Arbitrator  to  one  pertinent  fact,  that 


33 


in  Akron,  Ohio,  with  a  population  of  150,000, 
and  about  68  printers  in  tnc  town,  they  are  now 
receiving    within    fifty    cents   of    New    York   City. 

Mr.  Poi-\cuEK — And  one  of  the  most  expensive 
towns  in  the   United  States  to  live  in. 

Mr.  Wakdman — Let  us  have  Jersey  City  and 
Newark,  across  the  river,  where  so  many  of  us 
live. 

Mr.  RovsB — I  submit  to  the  Arbitrator  this 
whole  increase,  the  increase  from  1914  to  1918, 
of  former  scales  and  it  will  not  be  necessary  to 
point  them  out.  For  instance  here  is  another 
one:  Chicago  he  has  at  $31  and  $33.  Chicago 
is  $37.20  and  $39.60.  He  has  Seattle  here  as 
^53    and    $36.      And    Seattle    is 

Mr.    Wardman — What  is  the  Boston   award  ? 

Mr.  Rouse — It  is  a  decision  of  the  Arbitration 
Board,   an    $8.40   award. 

Mr.  Wardman — That  is  a  new  scale? 

Mr.  Rouse — Yes,  assigned  for  a  number  of 
years.  Now,  as  I  said,  in  Seattle  Mr.  Polachek's 
figures  are  $33  and  $36,  and  the  correct  figures 
are,  for  Seattle,  42  hour  week,  day  work,  $42; 
night  work,  42  hour  week,  $45;  $7  a  day  and 
seven  and  a  half  for  night  work.  I  do  not  think 
it  is  necessary  to  mention  further  items.  Tacoma 
is   the    same    way. 

I  wish  to  call  the  attention  of  the  Arbitrator 
to  Portland,  Oregon,  and  he  will  note  on  the  side 
of  this  paper,  "represents  $6.30  increase";  they 
are  now  in  arbitration  proceedings  for  more 
money.  Denver  is  in  arbitration  proceedings. 
Omaha,  Cincinnati,  Evansville — any  number  of 
these  are  old  contracts.  Albany  is  now  negotiat- 
ing a  nine-dollar  contract,  the  same  as  we  are. 

Mr.  PoLACHEK — You  are  better  posted  on  those 
new   scales  than  we  are. 

Mr.  Rouse — I  will  submit  that  as  a  Union  Ex- 
hibit. That  absolutely  refutes  what  is  in  Mr. 
Polachek's  brief  on   that  subject. 

(Marked  Exhibit  Q.) 

Mr.   PoLACHEK — Who   authenticates  that? 

Mr.  Rouse — That  is  direct  from  headquarters, 
from  Indianapolis. 

Mr.  PoLACHEK — Why  don't  we  get  the  same 
information  ? 

Mr.  Rouse— Why  don't  you  ask  for  it?  What 
is  the  idea  of  submitting  the  January  Bulletin 
to  us? 

Mr.  PoLACHEK — We  have  the  best  we  could 
get  in  the  Bulletin. 

Mr.  MoRXisoN — What  is  the  date  of  this  ex- 
hibit Q? 

Mr.  RotJSE — That  would  be  about  three  weeks 
ago,  about  the  1st  of  April;  and  there  have  been 
other   changes   since   then. 

Mr.  Morrison — ^And  this  is  January  25th,  Mr. 
Polachek? 

Mr.  Polachek — Yes,  I   stated  that. 

Mr.  Rot;sE — His  figures  are  obsolete  at  the 
present  time.  I  wish  to  call  attention  of  the 
Arbitrator  to  page  5  of  the  Publishers'  brief, 
where  they  say  they  have  had  to  meet  wage  scale 
increases  in  all  departments,  ranging  from  25 
per  cent,  to  75  per  cent.  I  wish  to  call  to  the 
attention  of  the  Arbitrator  that  in  making  the 
statement  that  they  have  increased  from  25  per 
cent.,  the  printers  have  not  participated  in  this 
splendid  show  of  liberality  on  their  part,  but 
have  received  approximately  nine  cents  per  hour, 
less  than  15  per  cent.  Also  they  say:  "On  this 
payroll  are  the  highest  paid  men  as  well  as  the 
largest  force  numerically,"  and  so  forth.  We 
agree  to  the  numerical  point  but  we  dissent  on 
the  "  highest  paid  men  "  and  we  proye^  our  con- 
tention on  that  by  our  numerous  exhibits  of  the 
higher  scales  paid  to  the  photo-engravers  and  the 
machinists. 

They  say  later  on :  "  The  Publishers  are  not 
opposing  the  demand  of  the  Tyi)ographical  Union 
on  any  ground  except  that  it  is  exorbitant  and 
unwarranted  either  by  business  conditions  con- 
fronting the  Publishers  or  by  the  necessities  con- 
fronting the  Typographical  Union  members." 

We  have  recited  that  the  cost  of  living,  as  one 
phase  of  contention,  has  gone  up  79  per  cent. 
We  have  recited  that  60  per  cent,  of  this  cost  of 
living  has  been  borne  by  us,  and  that  all  we  are 


asking  for  is  an  adjustment  of  the  wages  in 
accordance  with  our  skill  and  30  per  cent.,  which 
is  an  increase  of  $9  based  on  the  cost  of  living; 
and  we  consider  such  an  award  as  most  moderate 
and  most  reasonable,  owing  to  the  fact  that  we 
have  received,  as  I  have  said  before  but  9  cents 
insisting  on  cutting  down  the  hours.  We  are 
insisting  upon  remaining  upon  the  same  basis  as 
we  have  operated  in  this  city  for  over  a  quarter 
of  a  century.  We  should  have  been  very  glad, 
however,  to  have  presented  a  reduction  or  hours 
in  this  proceeding,  and  I  am  quite  sure  that  with 
the  evidence  we  have  produced  we  might  con- 
vince the  Arbitrator  that  we  ought  to  have  them. 

Mr.  Morrison — As  I  understand  it,  that  is  not 
before  the  Arbitrator. 

Mr.  Rouse — I  wish  to  call  particular  attention 
of  the  Arbitrator  to  the  bottom  of  page  5  of  the 
Publishers'  brief,  where  they  say:  "  In  this  con- 
nection, we  call  the  Arbitrator's  attention  to  the 
request  of  the  Publishers'  Association  for  an 
eight-hour  work  day.  The  eight-hour  day  is  a 
fair  day's  work  and  it  is  commonly  accepted  as  a 
fair  day's  work.  It  has  been  the  slogan  of  the 
Typographical    Union    for    many    years." 

I  want  to  impress  upon  the  Arbitrator  this 
point:  Speaking  for  my  colleagues  and  for  the 
members  of  the  Union  working  in  the  newspaper 
industry,  we  would  rather  have  no  award  made 
to  us,  not  one  single  penny;  we  would  rather 
struggle  along  under  the  existing  conditions, 
hard  as  they  may  be,  rather  than  to  have  one  of 
these  conditions  taken  away  from  us.  To  take  any 
of  these  conditions  away,  or  to  lengthen  the 
hours,  would  be  most  disastrous  to  us,  and  we 
would  resent  it  exceedingly.  We  would  rather 
not  have  any  money  awarded  to  us,  rather  than 
to  have  one  of  these  conditions  that  have  existed 
for  over  a   quarter   of  a   century   eliminated. 

The  bulk  of  our  men  in  the  newspapers  work 
at  night,  and  the  hours  in  the  book  and  job 
offices  at  night  are  just  the  same  as  the  hours 
in  the  newspaper  office;  and  in  addition  to  that 
the  men  on  the  lobster  forces  in  the  book  and 
job  offices  work  39  hours  per  week  as  against 
42  in  the  newspapers,  and  receive  more  money 
for  their  39  hours  than  they  do  in  the  news- 
papers   for    42. 

Mr.  Wardman — How  much  more — a  dollar 
and  a   half? 

Mr.  Rouse — A  dollar  and  a  half  and  three 
hours    less. 

Mr.  Plachek — A  dollar  and  a  half  more  than 
the   present   scale? 

Mr.  Rouse — And   three    hours    less. 

I  read  again  from  the  Publishers'  brief:  "Then 
there  is  another  matter  in  working  conditions 
and  hours  which  works  as  a  hardship  on  the 
publisher  and  costs  him  heavily  and  that  is  the 
limitation  placed  by  the  Union  on  the  shift 
hours.  This  limitation  is  not  very  important  to 
the  Union  but  it  is  extremely  important  to  the 
publisher."  I  wish  to  emphasize  very  strongly 
what  this  shift  proposition  would  mean.  Take 
a  community  of  the  character  of  New  York, 
where  men  live  all  the  way  from  an  hour  and 
a  half  to  two  hours'  travel  from  their  places  of 
business,  very  few  men  can  go  to  and  fro  from 
their  work  in  less  than  that  time,  owing  to  the 
conditions  of  the  city;  and  to  change  those 
hours  and  to  give  them  any  shifting  or  splitting 
proposition  would  be  just  as  disastrous  to  us  as 
you  could  possibly  imagine;  and  the  same  applies 
to  that,  that  rather  than  have  those  hours 
changed,  which  have  worked  well  here  for  over 
twenty-nine  years  to  my  personal  knowledge,  we 
would  rather  not  have  one  penny  awarded  to  us. 
We  want  to  impress  the  Arbitrator  with  that 
fact. 

Mr.  Wardman — You  would  get  home  earlier  if 
you  took  a  train   earlier. 

Mr.  Douglas — If  you  take  a  man  that  com- 
mutes, and  he  has  certain  leaving  hours  for  home, 
and  he  got  away  early  he  might  not  catch  a  train 
to  get  home  until  his  regular  train  that  he  has 
been    in   the   habit   of   taking. 

Mr.  Rouse — The  members  of  the  Union  have 
to  depend  on  what  is  known  as  the  commuters' 
trains  of  the  Erie,  the  Lackawanna,  the  New 
York  Central  or  the  Central  Railroad  of  New 
Jersey;  and  to  make  them  start  earlier  in  the 
mommg  would  undoubtedly  compel  men  to  more 


34 


away  from  localities  that  they  have  lived  in  all 
their  lives.  It  is  a  ridiculous,  unwarranted,  un- 
justifiable proposition  that  emanates  only  from 
the  brain  of  one  man  who  said:  "I  am  rather 
agreeable  to  going  into  arbitration,  I  might  get 
rid  of  some  obnoxious  restrictions."  In  other 
words,  to  make  labor  something  to  be  pushed 
back  and  kicked  about  at  will,  rather  than  make 
it  a  thing  that  should  have  certain  limitations 
within   reason. 

They  use  the  words:  "The  various  kinds  of 
newspapers  and  the  hours  of  work  should  be 
sufficiently  flexible  to  meet  the  variety  of  the 
requirements  of  the  business  of  each  of  these 
publishers."  I  do  not  know  what  they  mean  by 
the  word  "  flexible,"  but  I  imagine  they  are 
going  to  try  to  make  a  printer  like  a  piece  of 
elastic,  so  that  they  can  stretch  him  out  over  a 
twenty-four-hour  period.  I  think  Mr.  Seitz  in 
all  fairness  will  agree  with  me  that  the  contract 
drawn  between  the  Publishers  and  the  Printers 
is  one  of  the  most  flexible  in  existence  in  the 
United  States;  at  least,  he  has  admitted  so  in 
former  years,  unless  he  has  changed  his  opinions 
owing  to  his  environment — but  that  was  his  atti- 
tude and  that  was  his  declaration  in  previous 
proceedings,  that  the  contract  existing  between 
the  Publishers'  Association  and  the  Typographical 
Union  was  the  most  flexible  one  in  the  United 
States,  and  the  most  concrete  and  the  most 
workable  one.  I  do  not  think  he  would  want  to 
deny  that  statement.  It  is  a  matter  of  public 
record. 

I  read  again  from  the  Publishers'  brief: 
"  The  Publishers  present  for  the  Arbitrator's 
consideration  the  fact  that  a  leeway  of  twelve 
hours  within  which  to  perform  the  day  work  and 
twelve  hours  within  which  to  perform  night  work 
is  a  common  practice  recognized  in  many  Typo- 
graphical Union  newspaper  contracts  and  in 
practically  all  book  and  job  printing  contracts. 
Thirty-one  cities  in  which  the  Typographical 
Union  has  newspaper  contracts  operate  on  the 
basis  of  two  eight-hour  shifts  around  the  clock 
with  twelve  hours  leeway  for  the  eight  hours 
work  on  both  day  and  night  shifts.  In  these 
cities  the  day  hours  are  from  6  a.  m.  to  6  p.  m., 
and  the  night  hours  from  6  p.  m.  to  6  a.  m., 
exactly  as  requested  by  the  New  York  Pub- 
lishers." 

They  cite  for  your  consideration  little  munic- 
ipalities where  there  are  a  handful  of  men  work- 
ing, and  where  the  men  can  in  most  cases,  as  Mr. 
Seitz  used  to  do,  go  home  to  lunch,  and  so  forth; 
and  it  is  not  comparable  with  the  working  con- 
ditions in  New  York  City;  and  we  reiterate  our 
former  position  on  this  same  matter,  that  we 
would  rather  struggle  along  as  best  we  can  on 
our  present  scale  than  for  any  of  these  things 
to   be   put   into    our   contract. 

Now,  I  submit  at  this  time  Exhibit  "  P,"  page 
49,  the  same  table  that  we  presented  before 
Arbitrator  Mitchell,  with  the  cities  enumerated, 
working  45  and  42  hours  per  week,  and  so  forth, 
in  support  of  our  contention  that  there  should  be 
no  lengthening  or  changing  of  the  hours  or  the 
time  of  starting  and  so  forth.  They  say  they 
agree  with  us  about  overtime,  that  it  should  be 
discouraged,  yet  they  do  not  present  any  solu- 
tion  for   it. 

Mr.  Seitz — Yes,  we  do,  we  present  this  in- 
crease  slide. 

Mr.  PoLACHEK — Give  it  to  us  on  the  days  it  is 
most  important.  We  are  not  insisting  on  6  to  6 
or    anything    like    that. 

Mr.   Rouse — You  have  not  any  proposition  pre- 
sented   that    will    eliminate    it? 
Mr.   Seitz — Yes,   we  have. 

Mr.  PoLACHEK — Here  is  a  record  of  overtime 
on  Saturdays;  fourteen  men  had  one  hour,  two 
men  had  an  hour  and  a  half,  thirty  men  had 
two  and  a  half  hours,  three  men  had  three  hours, 
thirty-five  men  had  three  and  a  half  hours,  seven 
men  had  four  hours,  fifty  men  had  four  hours 
and    a    half;    overtime    on    a    Saturday. 

Mr.  Rouse — What  does  the  rest  of  the  sched- 
ule  say   for  a  week? 

Mr.  PoLACHEK — 5,  1,  4,  3,  2,  1;  that  is  on  a 
Monday. 

Mr.  Keller — How  can  you  eliminate  the  over- 
time, when  you  in  your  agreed  statement  of  fact 
say   you    want   your    hours    6    to    6    night    work? 


Wouldn't  it  require  just  as  many  men  to  get  out 

your   Sunday  morning's  paper 

Mr.  Rouse — I  want  to  call  attention  to  this 
statement,  that  during  the  recent  war  period 
much  of  the  overtime  was  caused  by  the  fact 
that  there  was  a  shortage  of  printers.  I  call 
attention  of  the  Arbitrator  to  page  49  of  Exhibit 
"  P,"  the  total  number  of  men  in  newspapers  in 
1918: 

The  grand  total  working  day  work  was..  668 
The  grand  total  working  night  work  was.  1,005 
The   grand   total   midnight   work 103 


Grand    total    of   all    classes 1,776 

Grand  total  midnight  and  night  work    1,108 

We  find  at  the  present  time  the  total  number 
of  men  in  1919  working  day  work  was.  .  .  771 
Total  number  of  men  working  night  work    1,115 

Midnight     108 

All    classes    1,994 

Midnight     and     night 1,223 

Mr.  Wardman — That  does  not  alter  the  fact 
that  we  have  all  had  machines  dark  because  we 
could   not   man  them. 

Mr.  Rouse — Let  me  get  the  records  clear  on 
this. 

Mr.  Wardman — There  is  certainly  a  labor  short- 
age when  you  cannot  get  the  men  to  man  your 
machines. 

Mr.    Rouse — Let    me    get    the    record    clear.      I 
want  to  see  if  the  stenographer  has  these  figures. 
(Figures     compared     as     taken     down     by     the 
stenographer.) 

Now,  this  shows  that  there  are  over  200  men 
more  working  in  the  newspapers  to-day  than 
there  was  formerly.  I  am  comparing  the  period 
of  the  year.  It  is  a  well  known  fact  that  the 
busiest  time  in  a  newspaper  is  from  Washing- 
ton's Birthday  until  the  Fourth  of  July.  That  is 
as   old   as   Adam. 

Mr.  Wardman — That  is  right. 
Mr.  Rouse — And  these  figures  were  taken 
prior  to  that  period,  prior  to  the  summer  layoff. 
They  were  all  taken  at  the  peak  of  the  previous 
period.  We  are  showing  now,  where  it  is  just 
coming  into  the  busy  season,  that  there  are  over 
200  more  men  working  than  there  were  in  the 
busy  season,  proving  that  the  newspapers  are  in 
an  ultra-prosperous  period;  and  as  I  have  men- 
tioned, the  World  publishes  a  thirty-two-pa§e 
paper.  The  law  of  supply  and  demand  comes  in 
here.  They  have  so  much  business  that  we  can- 
not keep  up  with  it.  Men  are  coming  in  from 
the  war  at  the  rate  of  sixty  a  month  back  into 
our  Union,  and  they  are  going  right  to  work. 
There  are  more  travelling  cards  by  sixty  coming 
into  this  burg  every  month  than  are  going  out, 
showing  that  we  cannot  keep  up  the  supply, 
owing  to  this  big  demand  of  the  newspapers;  and 
in  book  and  job  offices  they  are  paying  all  kinds 
of  money  to  get  the  best  men. 

Mr.  Seitz — Isn't  it  very  desirable,  more  de- 
sirable than  if  you  had  a  bread  line  and  a 
charity    fund? 

Mr.  Rouse— But  it  proves  you  are  in  a  posi- 
tion  to   pay   more   money. 

Mr.  Seitz — It  shows  we  are  in  a  position  to 
hire  more  men — but  that  may  be  giving  you  all 
the    money   we    have   now. 

Mr.  Rouse— Wouldn't  you  rather  give  it  to  us 
than  to  anybody  else     Now,  be  frank  with  us. 
Mr.    Seitz — Yes,    I    would. 

Mr.  Wardman— Yes.  if  we  could  give  it  to  you 
wc  would  be  glad  to  ao  so. 

Mr.  Rouse — I  was  going  to  speak  of  Section 
7  in  the  Brooklyn  matter,  but  just  a  few  words 
to  allay  the  fears  of  Mr.  Gunnison.  Mr.  Gun- 
nison is  afraid  that  if  you  decide  in  our  favor 
you  will  put  something  into  the  document  that 
will  cause  all  the  other  brigands,  that  Mr.  .Scitz 
speaks  of,  to  swoop  down  upon  him  like  a  flock 
of  vultures,  and  demand  this  proposition.  All  we 
ask  you  to  do — and  to  make  your  work  very 
t-asy — is  to  simply  change  th.it  little  Section  7, 
so  that  it  will  read  ".Ml  members  working  Satur- 
day and  Saturday  night  shall  receive  $1.81  ex- 
tra." That  is  all  you  need  to  say.  You  need 
not  comment  on  it,  and  that  will  relieve  Mr. 
Gunnison. 

35 


Mr.  SuTZ — That  is  not  a  fair  statement  of 
it  at  all.  It  ilocs  not  relieve  Mr.  Gunnison. 
$1.J5  was  an  arbitrary  bonus.  What  you  arc 
iryini;  to  do  is  to  make  it  part  of  the  scale, 
winch  is  an  entirely  ditTercnt  matter. 

Mr.  RorsE — This  is  part  of  the  scale  contract. 

Mr.  Seitz — Mr.  Arbitrator,  they  are  trying 
to  increase  the  scale  and  increase  the  arbitrary 
Ininus  at  the  same  time,  which  is  not   fair. 

Mr.  Roi'SE— I  think  the  Arbitrator  fully  un- 
derstands the  situation,  and  I  am  not  going  to 
take   up   hi-s   time   any    further   on   that. 

Mr.  Morrison — If  this  whole  section  remains 
as  it  is.  with  just  the  change  in  the  dollar  and 
twenty-tive  cents,  that  won't  interfere  with  any 
other  part  of  it? 

Mr.  PoLACiiEK — Yes,  you  change  the  penalty. 
The  scale  is  one  thing.  The  penalty  he  pays 
to  have  the  call  on  those  men  at  night  is  an 
entirely    different    thing. 

Mr.  Seitz — He  is  asking  you  to  add  to  his 
day  bonus  a  pro  rata  of  his  proposed  scale, 
and  at  the  same  time  he  burdens  him  with  the 
scale.  Our  contention  is  that  the  dollar  twenty- 
five  should  remain  and  they  share  in  whatever 
increase  there  is  in  the  scale;  but  Mr.  Rouse 
is  doing  both,  he  is  increasing  the  scale  on 
them   and  increasing  the  bonus. 

Mr.  Rouse — Mr.  Seitz  has  stated  my  position 
correctly,  that  the  scale  per  day  is  increased 
for  day  work;  that  the  man  who  works  from 
Monday  to  Saturday  inclusive  only  participates 
in  the  scale  he  has  per  day  on  a  per  diem 
basis,  but  the  man  who  works  from  Monday  to 
Saturday  with  a  day  off  intervening,  and  works 
that  double  header  on  Saturday  and  Saturday 
night,  should  receive  extra  compensation  as 
against  the  man  who  works  only  six  days  at  day 
work.  If  Mr.  Seitz  had  a  like  condition,  he 
would  be  penalized.  If  Mr.  Seitz  wants  his  day 
hands  to  work  after  four  o'clock,  starting  at 
eight  in  the  morning  and  working  from  eight 
to  four,  and  work  them  four  hours,  Mr.  Seitz 
would  have  to  pay  them  overtime  rates.  Mr. 
Gunnison  don't  have  to  pay  them  overtime  rates, 
but  he  has  them  under  duress  for  two  hours, 
and  he  should  be  compelled  to  pay  them  con- 
tinuous time  from  four  to  six,  that  is  on  the 
scale    rate. 

Mr.  Morrison — This  Section  7  as  it  appears 
here  in  the  proposition  submitted  by  Typo- 
graphical Union  \o.  6  is  now  in  operation,  and 
if  you  only  changed  the  figures,  it  would  be  in 
the   shape  of  a  bonus,   really. 

Mr.  Rouse — Correct;  and  it  won't  be  a  boome- 
rang to  Mr.  Gunnison  from  any  of  the  other 
crafts. 

Mr.  PoLACHEK — Whatever  you  may  decide  as 
to  the  scale  will  be  applicable  to  these  sections, 
just  the  same  as  that  would  be  to  any  section. 
Whether  or  not  you  change  the  bonus,  makes 
no  difference.  The  bonus  is  entirely  separate 
and  apart  from  any  award  that  you  might  make 
on  a  scale;   but  not  as  they  state  it. 

Mr.  Seitz — The  bonus  should  remain  a  fixed 
factor.  If  the  Arbitrator  should  say  a  dollar 
twenty-five  is  not  sufficient  bonus,  that  is  an- 
other matter;  but  what  they  are  doing  is  they  are 
trying  to  do  both,  they  are  increasing  the  scale, 
and  at  the  same  time  they  are  making  the  scale 
increase  pro  rata  as  against  the  bonus;  whereas, 
we  contend  that  the  bonus  should  remain  a 
fixed    factor. 

Mr.  Rouse — In  all  elements  of  society,  when 
there  is  a  question  before  a  body,  or  an  issue, 
there  must  be  some  base  from  which  to  start. 
Now,  the  base  from  which  we  start  is  the  only 
base  from  which  that  originated,  and  that  is 
the  base  of  continuous  pay  from  four  to  six; 
as  I  pointed  out  when  the  scale  was  $30.  The 
hour  rate  was  62J  per  hour.  Now  take  62* 
and  multiply  it  by  two  and  it  gives  you  a  dollar 
twenty-five,  showing  where  that  came  from. 
Now,  we  say  that  under  our  proposed  increase 
it  will  be  90f  cents  per  hour  multiplied  by  two, 
and  that  gives,  without  the  fractions,  a  dollar 
eighty-one.  What  could  be  more  logical?  How 
better  could  we  get  at  it? 

Mr.  PoLACHEK — Why  didn't  you  raise  the 
same  contention  before  Mr.   Mitchell? 


Mr.  Rouse — Mr.  Oppenheimcr  had  to  stand 
the  gaff  of  a  good  strenuous  time  on  the  floor 
of  the  Union  for  his  neglect  in  that  matter; 
and  to-day,  what  Mr.  Oppenheimcr  neglected  to 
do,  and  as  showing  his  honesty  and  fairness  in 
assuming  the  responsibility  for  it,  we  are  en- 
deavoring   to    have    it    rectified. 

Mr.  -Morrison — I  understood  Mr.  Gunnison  to 
say  this  morning  that  the  matter  of  the  increase 
was  a   small   thing   on   the   bonus. 

Mr.  Rouse — Correct. 

Mr.  Morrison — But  that  he  did  not  want  the 
decision  rendered,  so  that  a  man  who  was 
working  in  the  night  and  did  not  work  in  the 
daytime,   for  example,   would   receive   the  bonus. 

Mr.  Rouse — Pardon  me  if  I  take  you  as  an 
example.  We  will  assume  that  you  have  a  sit- 
uation on  the  Brooklyn  Eagle,  and  you  work, 
we  will  say,  Monday,  Tuesday,  Wednesday, 
Thursday,  and  we  will  say  Friday  is  your  day 
off.  Well,  j'ou  take  Friday  and  Saturday 
off.  and  you  work  Saturday  night;  you  have 
worked  five  days;  you  get  paid  for  Monday, 
Tuesday,  Wednesday  and  Thursday  at  the  day 
scale.  Vou  get  paid  for  Saturday  night  at  the 
night  scale,  but  you  don't  get  this  dollar  and 
twenty-five  cents.  Why?  Because  you  were 
off  Saturday.  The  sub  works  and  he  don't  get 
it,  but  the  office  picks  up  a  dollar  and  twenty- 
five,  where  a  man  does  not  work  the  double 
header. 

Mr.    Morrison — Does   that   occur   very   often? 

Mr.  Rouse — It  does  occur  quite  frequently; 
but  where  the  man  works  Saturday  and  Satur- 
day night  he  gets  this  dollar  and  twenty-five 
cents,  because  he  is  in  continuous  service  from 
eight  in  the  morning  until  midnight,  and  he 
should  be  paid,  and  what  we  are  asking  you  to 
do  is  to  raise  that  up  so  that  it  levels  up  to 
what  the  award  will  be — nine  dollars,  we  hope. 
But  the  fear  that  is  in  Mr.  Gunnison's  mind  is 
this:  He  said  that  if  this  was  awarded  to  us, 
he  would  have  all  of  the  other  allied  trades  com- 
ing in  to  him  and  making  a  demand  for  the 
same  kind  of  intervening  time  for  two,  three, 
four,  five  and  six,  but  that  is  not  true,  because 
all  you  have  to  do  is  to  change  the  figures,  and 
say   nothing  about   bonus  time. 

I  have  one  other  point  that  I  want  to  bring 
out  about  the  extras.  The  Publishers  have  said 
something  about  the  extras.  This  section  was 
perhaps  one  of  the  most  exhaustively  argued 
that  we  had,  that  and  the  reproduction  sec- 
tion, and  our  great  objection  to  it  is  because  it 
w-ill  establish  what  will  be  termed  a  three  day 
situation,  and  make  of  a  certain  number  of  men 
preferred  men  to  the  detriment  of  other  men; 
and  we  hold  that  the  system  that  has  been 
placed  in  there  has  had  a  most  exhaustive  re- 
view by  Mr.  Mitchell,  and  it  was  written  by 
him,  not  a  printer,  and  after  hearing  our  argu- 
ment, placed  there  in  his  own  words,  to  avoid 
favoritism  or  the  appearance  of  favoritism.  We 
strenuously  object  to  any  modification  of  that 
section  on  extras.  I  have  here  cases  that  came 
from   Mr.   Polachek's  office,  as  follows: 

The  following  have  all  held  situations  on  the 
American  and  Journal  at  various  times,  and 
some  of  them  now  hold  regular  situations,  but 
have  been  laid  off  at  different  times  to  reduce 
the   force. 

Case  No.  1:  Priority,  March  30th,  1908— 
Card  No.  5676.  During  the  year  1916-1917  did 
not  average  one  day  a  week  extra  work  from 
the  office.  Discrimination  from  the  foreman 
then  in  charge.  Am  now  a  regular  situation 
holder. 

Case  No.  2:  Priority  January  28th,  1912 — 
Card  No.  1920.  In  1917  was  le?  walk  night  af- 
ter night  and  strangers  were  put  on  nightly. 
Foreman  said  he  was  perfectly  satisfied  with 
my  work,  but  as  long  as  he  had  the  right  to 
hire   extras   he   would   put   on   whom   he   pleased. 

Case  No.  3.  Priority  September  21st,  1918 — 
Card  No.  1008.  During  the  three  years  previ- 
ous to  April,  1918,  owing  to  discrimination  by 
the  foreman  then  in  charge,  received  but  three 
days  extra  work  from  the  office  in  three  years. 

Case  No.  4.  Priority  October  22nd.  1910 — 
Card  No.  3316.  During  1916-1917,  when  laid 
off  to   reduce  the   force,   did   not   receive   a  single 


36 


night's  work  from  the  office  as  extra,  showing  up 
regularly. 

Case  No.  5.  Priority  April  20th,  1907— Card 
No.  2961.  Have  held  several  situations,  all  ter- 
minated by  dull  season  layoff.  The  year  1917 
was  productive  of  twenty-one  days  given  me 
by  the  office,  although  I  was  very  faithful  in 
attendance. 

Case  No.  6.  Priority  August  1,  1910 — Card  No. 
1414.  Showed  up  every  night  for  eleven  weeks 
artd  got  only  one  night.  Other  men  were  get- 
ting four  and  five  nights  every  week.  No  fault 
was  ever  found  with  my  work.  Have  always 
tried  to  give  my  employer  the  best  that  was  in 
me. 

Case  No.  7.  Priority  September  2d,  1915 — 
Card  No.  31479. 

The   letters   in   the   cases   Nos.    1,   2,   3,   4,   S,   6 
and   7   were  marked  as  exhibits  as  follows: 
No.   1,  Union   Exhibit  R. 
No.  2,  Union  Exhibit  S. 
No.  3,  Union   Exhibit  T. 
No.  4,  Union  Exhibit  U. 
No.   5,  Union  Exhibit  V. 
No.  6,  Union  Exhibit  W. 
No.  7.  Union  Exhibit  Y. 
Mr.   Morrison — While  it  is  true  that  you  have 
not   asked   for  this   change,   has  this  decision  that 
was   rendered   by   the   last   Arbitrator   worked   any 
hardship    in   your   offices? 

Mr.  PoLACHEK — I  do  not  think  it  is  work- 
ing any  real  hardship.  The  foremen  com- 
plain of  it.  As  long  as  we  are  on  that  side, 
I  think  it  might  be  pertinent  to  the  Arbitrator 
to  know  just  exactly  what  was  in  dispute  when 
we  were  arbitrating  this  thing  the  last  time. 
In  presenting  the  argument  on  this  case  Mr. 
Oppenheimer  presented  an  argument  for  the 
Typographical  Union  on  the  question  of  extras. 
Then  we  were  not  permitted  to  put  in  extras 
except  at  the  beginning  of  a  shift,  had  no 
chance  to  order  them  in  advance  at  all;  and  the 
complaint  that  the  Publishers  made  at  that  time 
was  not  that  they  wanted  any  prerogative  at  all, 
but  they  wanted  the  right  to  have  men.  You 
see  the  situation  holder,  having  a  mortgage  on 
his  job,  and  having  the  first  right,  having  forty- 
eight  hours'  right,  I  believe  it  was,  to  select  a 
substitute  for  himself,  a  number  of  our  regulars 
could  of  their  own  volition  decide  that  on  cer- 
tain days  they  would  get  off,  and  they  would 
go  to  the  extra  substitute  list  and  select  the 
substitutes  they  wanted  to  work  for  them;  it 
might  be  on  a  very  busy  day  and  the  substitute 
line  would  be  depleted  by  the  selections  of  these 
regulars,  and  we  would  not  have  any  extras  to  put 
on.  So  we  wanted  to  get  that  corrected,  so 
that  the  office  could  for  Thursdays,  Fridays  and 
Saturdays,  these  busy  days,  have  extras  and 
order  them  in  advance.  I  will  just  repeat  what 
I  said  to. the  Arbitrator  in  the  last  arbitration, 
I    will   read   it: 

"  The  Publishers'  request  in  Section  14,  that 
extras  may  be  put  on  for  two,  three  or  four 
days'  work,  as  the  requirements  of  the  office 
demands,  calls  for  no  further  argument  than 
that  presented  by  the  Union  itself.  The  Pub- 
lishers call  the  attention  of  the  Arbitrator  to 
Mr.  Oppenheimer's  testimony  on  this  point.  Mr. 
Oppenheimer  explained  the  desirability  of  main- 
taining the  present  status  by  saying  that  he  had 
not  yet  made  up  his  mind  whether  or  not  he 
would  work  on  the  following  day.  If  it  is  a  bright 
day  he  would  stay  away  from  work  and  put  on 
a  substitute,  that  he  might  enjoy  himself,  but 
if  it  were  a  rainy  day  he  would  work,  and, 
inasmuch  as  he  wanted  to  have  the  privilege 
continued  to  him  and  to  his  fellow  workmen, 
he  did  not  want  any  change  in  the  clause  govern- 
ing extras.  We  call  the  attention  of  the  Arbi- 
trator to  this  forceful  substantiation  of  the 
Publishers'  contention  that  this  denial  of  right 
to  put  extras  on  for  more  than  one  day  was 
purely  a  selfish  reservation  of  extra  privileges 
to  the  regular  situation  holder  to  the  detriment 
of  the  employer  and  to  the  detriment  of  the 
man   who   does   not   hold   a  regular  situation." 

That  was  the  point  that  Mr.  Mitchell  decided 
in   our   favor,   but   as   I    have   it   from   the   various 


executives  in  the  composing  room,  the  fact  is 
that  after  a  man  has  been  put  on  for  the  three 
days  which  Mr.  Mitchell  allowed,  he  can't  again 
be  put  on  at  another  hiring  until  all  the  other 
men  on  the  extra  substitute  list  has  had   work. 

Mr.  Morrison^— Will  you  read  into  the  record 
the  original  clause  that  was  in  your  argument, 
which  is  changed  by  this  decision,  which  you 
would  offer  to  go  back  to  if  the  Publishers 
agreed   to    it? 

Mr.  Oppenheimer — I  do  not  think  our  Chair- 
man made  that  in  good  faith,  because  we  admit 
that  the  original   proposition   was  not   a   fair  one. 

Mr.  PoLACHEK — I  will  read  this  into  the  rec- 
ord: 

"  Extras  may  be  put  on  in  machine  offices, 
either  day  or  night,  and  shall  receive  fifty  cents 
in  addition  to  the  regular  scale.  Such  extras 
miist  be  put  on  from  day  to  day,  but  when  the 
offices  need  extras  to  go  on  before  the  regular 
time  for  beginning  work  they  may  be  engaged 
the  day  before." 

Mr.  Oppenheimer — That  old  section  has  noth- 
ing to  do  with  this  arbitration  proceeding.  Mr. 
Polachek  is  very  anxious  to  get  it  into  the 
record,  and  we  are  perfectly  willing  to  have  it 
there,  but  there  is  camouflage  in  putting  it  in 
because  it  has  nothing  to  do  with  these  proceed- 
ings. 

Mr.  Seitz — I  take  exception  to  that,  because 
Mr.  Rouse  introduced  it. 

Mr.  Oppenheimer — I  don't  care  whether  you 
take  exception  or  not,  because  the  only  thing  in 
these  proceedings  is  the  agreed  statement  of 
fact,  and  there  is  no  old  section  in  the  agreed 
statement  of  fact.  The  very  thing  that  Mr. 
Polachek  calls  your  attention  to  is  the  very  thing 
that  we  object  to.  The  foreman  practically  ad- 
mits, if  you  read  between  the  lines,  that  this  sec- 
tion prevents  him  from  playing  favorites,  from 
making  three-day  situation.  That  is  all  he  com- 
plains of.  I  admit,  as  one  member  of  the  com- 
mittee that  the  old  section  was  not  fair  to  the 
employer,  but  now  the  present  section,  as  written 
by  Arbitrator  Mitchell  is  a  perfectly  fair  con- 
struction of  that  section  and  it  works  harmon- 
iously; it  works  for  the  good  of  all,  and  while 
Mr.  Polachek  may  be  able  to  furnish  you  state- 
ments from  foremen  that  it  does  not  work  well, 
because  as  foremen  they  like  to  play  favorites, 
at  the  same  time  we  on  our  side  will  furnish  you 
with  the  unanimous  statement  of  all  our  Chair- 
men, past  and  present,  and  the  chapels  as  a 
whole,  that  it  does  work  well.  We  will  furnish 
you  with  the  referendum  of  the  Union  that  it 
works  well  as  against  the  few  foremen  who  are 
prohibited  from  playing  favorites  under  this 
section. 

Mr.  Polachek — May  I  be  permitted  to  give 
you  not  Union  foremen  or  the  individual  side, 
but  the  Publisher's  side  of  this?  From  time 
immemorial  the  Publishers  have  refused  to  recog- 
nize the  priority  rule  as  applied  to  the  extra  or 
substitute  list.  They  recognize  priority  of  situa- 
tion holders,  but  none  of  the  extra  list.  Novv, 
the  decision  of  Mr.  Mitchell,  as  modified  by  his 
drawing  of  the  section,  converts  the  extra  list 
automatically  into  a  priority  list  on  the  appoint- 
ment of  extras.  The  principle  of  that  thing  is 
what  the  Publishers  object  to.  They  do  not 
want  priority  extended  by  arbitrary  ruling  or 
by  construction  or  in  any  other  way  beyond  the 
point  where  it  legitimately  lies,  and  that  is  the 
situation  holders. 

Mr.  Rouse — Answering  Mr.  Polachek — and  I 
say  this  good-naturedly — that  he  has  a  most 
happy  faculty  of  trying  to  camouflage  the  issue 
and  befog  the  mind  of  the  Arbitrator.  He  tells 
you  that  we  arc  trying  to  extend  the  priority 
law   in   the  giving  out  of  extra   work. 

Mr.    Seitz— He   said    it   has   been   done. 

Mr.  Rouse — Nothing  of  the  sort,  and  the 
ITnion  has  quoted  the  words  of  the  Hon.  John 
Mitchell  explicity,  where  we  endeavored  to  h.-jvc 
the  rotary  list  adopted  as  the  proposition  coming 
from  the  Union,  and  he  decided  against  us.  Now 
it  means  simply  this— I  know  you  did  work  at 
the  printing  trade  once,  Mr.  Morrison,  and  I 
know  you  will  understand  me  when  I  speak _  in 
the  vernacular  of  the  trade.  A  man  is  showing 
up  in  the  New  York  American  and  Journal  office. 


Zl 


and  he  in«y  be  showinc  up  in  several  offices,  he 
cannot  be  put  to  work  as  an  extra  in  pne  of 
these  offices  unless  he  has  signed  a  priority  book. 
He  can  work  as  a  substitute,  but  he  cannot  hold 
priority  in  the  New  York  Ami-ricnn  office  and 
BO  over  to  work  as  an  extra,  over  the  heads  of 
the  priorily  men  in  the  Tribune  office;  he  can 
work  as  a  substitute  not  as  an  extra.  Now,  all 
they  ask  of  a  man,  if  he  is  honest,  is  to  sign  the 
priority  book  and  show  a  legitimate  desire  to 
uphold  his  priority  in  that  office,  and  he  is 
available  for  extra  work,  not  in  order  of  priority, 
but  as  a  bona  fide  member  of  the  chapel.  Now, 
that  is  far  from  what  Mr.  Polacbek  would  lead 
▼ou  to  believe,  that  he  would  have  to  be  put  on 
m  the  order  of  his  priority.     Nothing  of  the  sort. 

Mr.  Seitz — He  is  taken  off  in  the  order  of  his 
priority. 

Mr.  RovsE — I  beg  your  pardon.  He  is  not. 
There  are  fifty  men  standing  over  there,  and  the 
foreman  can  go  over  among  those  fifty  men  and 
select  any  five,  ten,  fifteen,  twenty  of  them  to- 
night and"  put  them  to  work,  and  put  them  on  for 
three  consecutive  nights.  He  does  not  have  to 
pick  them  in  the  order  of  their  priority.  _\Ve 
will  assume  he  has  picked  twenty  men.  Next 
week  there  are  still  tnirty  men  that  did  not  get 
a  day's  work  in  that  office  that  week  as  extras. 
The  next  week  he  can't  pick  those  twenty  men 
that  he  picked  the  week  before  at  all,  until  those 
other  thirty  men  have  had  three  days  in  that 
week;  if  only  ten  of  those  thirty  men  get  three 
days,  there  are  still  twenty  men  that  have  not 
had  three  days.  The  following  week  the  orig- 
inal twenty  men  are  available  to  go  back  on  the 
list  again,  and  these  twenty  men  still  would  not 
have  it;  so  you  see  it  is  neither  a  priority  list 
neither  is  it  a  rotary  list,  but  it  is  a  list  that 
demands  of  a  man  an  honesty  of  purpose,  of 
seeking  work  in  one  office,  not  flying  from  one 
to  the  other.  Now,  this  rule  has  worked  splen- 
didly, and  does  not  show  any  hardship  to  the 
proprietor.  On  the  contrary  it  makes  for  per- 
manency of  subs  or  extras,  because  a  man  will 
stay  in  an  office  if  he  knows  that  he  is  going  to 
get  his  legitimate  amount  of  work  from  the 
office,  because  the  law  says  that  once  every  so 
often  he  has  got  to  get  it;  whereas,  under  an 
open  proposition,  you  could  go  into  the  Journal 
office  and  the  foreman  could  pass  you  up  every 
day  in  the  week;  you  could  be  on  that  priority 
list,  and  he  could  pass  you  up.  But  under  the 
system  now,  you  would  know  that  if  I  was  put 
on  this  week  and  received  three  nights,  next 
week  if  you  had  not  received  three  nights  the 
previous  week,  and  you  were  on  the  floor  and 
I  was  on  the  floor,  you  would  get  those  three 
nights.  It  is  a  fair,  honest  and  proper  proposi- 
tion, and  decided  by  a  man  not  a  printer;  I  want 
to  say  for  Mr.  Mitchell  that  I  think  he  rendered 
one  of  the  most  comprehensive  and  honest  de- 
cisions that  I  ever  read  on  this  question  highly 
impregnated  with  all  its  technical  aspect — he  got 
right  to  the  meat  of  the  cocoanut  and  understood 
it. 

In  concluding  for  the  Union  I  want  to  call 
the  Arbitrator's  attention  to  the  last  page.  Pub- 
lishers' proposition  41,  and  you  will  note  that 
they  have  placed  there  a  proposition  opposite 
the  machinists.  They  call  for  the  old  rate.  I 
want  to  call  the  particular  attention  of  the 
Arbitrator  to  the  fact  that  whatever  the  award 
will  be,  and  we  hope  it  will  be  nine  dollars,  it 
will  include  the  machinists  just  the  same  as 
the  other  members  of  the  Union,  because  they 
are  all  under  the  jurisdiction  of  the  Union.  The 
publishers  have  simply  submitted  for  your  read- 
ing the  old  scale;  there  is  no  change  in  there 
whatsoever,  except  the  figure  changes.  Now 
then,  take  Section  44,  it  simply  leaves  the  old 
section  stand  at  price  and  a  half,  where  we  are 
asking  for  double  time  for  over  time. 

I  have  nothing  further  to  offer,  except  to 
say  that  on  behalf  of  Typographical  Union  No. 
6,  and  my  colleagues,  I  want  to  thank  you,  Mr. 
Morrison,  for  your  acceptance  of  the  position 
of  Arbitrator.  We  appreciate  the  responsibility 
involved,  and  your  graciousness  in  accepting  it, 
and  we  thank  you;  and  we  wish  to  lay  emphasis 
once  more  upon  our  position,  that  we  would 
rather  struggle  along  under  the  existing  scale 
than  have  any  of  these  proposals,  so  revolu- 
tionary, so  drastic,  so  impregnated  with  pos- 
sibility   of    dissatisfaction — we    want    you    to    be 


impressed  thoroughly  with  the  fact  that  we 
would  rather  go  along  as  we  are  than  to  have 
any  of  them  taken  away.  We  know  the  argu- 
ment of  the  Union  is  just;  and  we  trust  you 
will  award  us  the  full  amount.  Again  thank- 
ing you,  and  also  the  members  of  the  Publishers' 
Association  for  their  gentlemanly  conduct  and 
the  good  feeling  that  has  been  manifested  in 
the  whole  atmosphere  of  the  negotiations,  we 
will  conclude  our  side  of  the  argument. 

Mr.  PoLACHEK — Do  you  want  me  to  close  to- 
night?    It   will  take  only  a  few  minutes? 

Mr.   Morrison — Just   as   you   say. 

Mr.  PoLACHEK — I  might  as  well,  for  that  will 
relieve  us  of  any  further  sessions.  I  would 
like  to  present  for  the  Publishers  the  record  of 
the  previous  Arbitration,  and  call  the  attention 
of  the  Arbitrator  to  page  27,  which  contains 
Publishers'  former  Exhibit  C  on  the  question 
of  shift  hours.  I  would  like  to  enter  this  as  an 
exhibit  again  in  this  case,  for  the  attention  of 
the  Arbitrator,  as  to  the  character  of  shift  hours 
in  existence  under  the  various  contracts  of  the 
Typographical  Union  in  the  various  cities  of  the 
United  States  in  the   newspaper  offices. 

(Marked    Publishers'   Exhibit   B.) 

Also  in  Exhibit  B  I  will  present  page  97 
which  contains  the  full  decision  of  the  Arbitra- 
tor which  I  promised  you,  Mr.  Morrison,  that 
I   would   put   in   the    record. 

Also  I  call  the  attention  of  the  Arbitrator  to 
page  88  of  Exhibit  B,  which  mentions  the  mat- 
ter I  refer  to  on  the  extra  situation. 

Mr.  RotrsE — Why  not  make  the  suggestion 
that   he  read  the   whole  proceedings? 

Mr.  PoLACHEK — No,  I  would  not  impose  that 
on  Mr.  Morrison.  Now,  as  to  the  shift  hours, 
Mr.  Morrison,  while  as  I  have  said  the  Publishers 
have  put  in  what  is  the  logical  division  of  day 
and  night,  twelve  hours  day  and  twelve  hours 
at  night,  the  Publishers  want  to  present  this 
thing  to  the  Arbitrator  in  a  way  that  will  bring  a 
verdict  which  will  ameliorate  the  working  condi- 
tions. We  do  not  need  six  to  six  in  either  case. 
The  day  side  of  the  newspajiers  in  no  case  re- 
quires any  extension,  so  this  talk  about  men 
coming  to  work  around  six  o'clock  in  the  morn- 
ing "is  all  buncom,  because  nobody  wants  them 
there.  But  the  night  side  of  the  newspaper, 
which  means  doing  the  work  for  the  morning 
paper  and  doing  the  advertising  composition  for 
the  evening  paper  of  the  next  day,  that  is  what 
causes  the  work  of  the  third  shift.  If  it  were 
possible  to  put  two  shifts  on  running  from  a 
late  afternoon  hour  until  the  morning  hour, 
notably  on  Saturday,  where  the  paper  could 
bring  in  a  day  force  to  work  until  six  o'clock 
at  night,  and  another  force  to  pick  up  work 
from  that  point  on,  this  question  of  overtime 
would  be  largely  eliminatea;  and  at  the  same 
time  this  horrible  shift  that  they  talk  about, 
this  lobster  shift  would  be  wiped  out.  But  this 
lobster  shift  is  absolutely  forced  on  us,  because 
as  you  will  see,  a  newspaper,  for  instance,  likt 
the  New  York  World  or  the  New  York  Sun  ot 
the  New  York  American  or  the  New  York  Her- 
ald and  Telegram,  or  American  and  Journal, 
publishing  morning  and  evening  editions  in  the 
one  composing  room,  require  a  reasonable  force 
to  get  out  a  regular  morning  edition,  and  then 
they  require  a  force  to  get  out  the  advertising 
for  the  evening  editions.  Now,  if  it  were  pos- 
sible to  phalanx  men,  for  instance  if  it  were 
possible  for  a  composing  room  foreman  to  order 
a  shift  of  men,  instead  of  two  o'clock  in  the 
morning  at  nine  o'clock  in  the  evening,  it  would 
be  a  legitimate  hour  for  night  work  and  those 
men  would  work  from  nine  at  night  until  five 
in  the  morning,  would  be  a  night  shift,  and 
that  would  obviate  the  necessity  of  any  men 
reporting  at  two  o'clock  in  the  morning  for  work, 
they  would  not  need  to.  In  the  same  way,  even 
providing  for  Saturday  afternoon,  if  they  merely 
expected  Saturday  afternoon  from  this  propo- 
sition, and  permitted  a  force  to  be  brought  on 
at  regular  times,  any  time  after  one  o'clock 
on  Saturday  after  noon,  to  meet  the  needs  of 
this  heavy  Sunday  newspaper  business,  there 
would  not  be  any  overtime. 

Mr.  Rouse — You  could  not  do  that  under  this 
agreed  statement  of  facts,  because  you  have 
agreed    to    the    twelve    hour    law. 


38 


Mr.  PoLACHEK — How  do  you  mean,  we  have 
agreed    to    the    twelve    hour    law? 

Mr.  Rouse — That  the  twelve  hours  must  in- 
tervene. You  cannot  change  that.  If  they  quit 
at  three  o'clock,  how  could  they  be  brought  in 
at   one  ? 

Mr.  PoLACHEK — They  can  be  brought  in  at 
three    then. 

Mr.    Rouse — They    can    do    that    now. 

Mr.    PoLACHEK — At    overtime    rates. 

Mr.    Rouse — Yes. 

Mr.  PoLACHEK — And  you  want  to  penalize  us 
for  the  overtime  that  you  force  on  us.  Now, 
here  is  a  record  of  the  New  York  Times  for  two 
weeks.  I  will  submit  the  whole  thing  in  evi- 
dence. 

(Marked    Publishers'    Exhibit    C.) 

I  will  show  you  here  the  last  two  weeks  of 
March    on    overtime 

Mr.  Rouse — May  I  interrupt  you  there,  Mr. 
Polachek? 

Mr.  Polachek — You  can  do  anything  you 
please. 

Mr.  Rouse — Mr.  Polachek  has  used  the  Times 
office,  Mr.  Morrison.  Now  we  say  that  over- 
time could  be  obviated  if  they  would  avail 
themselves  of  the  provision  of  the  scale.  How 
many  men  have  you,  Mr.  Polachek  on  the 
lobster    shift    in    the    Journalf 

Mr.    Polachek — I    do    not    know. 

Mr.    Rouse — I    will    tell    you. 

Mr.  Polachek — You  are  better  informed  than 
I  am.  We  have  cut  down  the  lobster  shift  as 
much  as  we  possibly  could.  We  do  not  believe 
in  working  the  men  those  hours.  We  would 
rather  do  the  work  within  normal  hours  when 
the    whole    force    is    working. 

Mr.  Rouse — They  have  on  the  American  and 
Journal  34  men  working  on  their  lobster  shift, 
showing  that  they  do  make  provision  to  over- 
come this  overtime.  In  the  Times,  which  they 
are  using  here  as  the  terrible  example,  they 
employ  just  three  men  on  their  lobster  shift. 
Why  don't  they  avail  themselves  of  the  privi- 
lege of  the  scale?  I  would  like  to  ask  Mr. 
Seitz  about  the  World.  The  World  employes 
29  men  on  their  lobster  shift — the  Times 
has  three.  Why  don't  they  avail  themselves  of 
the  same  provisions  that  the  other  newspapers 
do?  A  great  deal  of  the  hardships  of  the 
Times  is  involved  around  the  composing  room, 
but  they  don't  want  to  do  these  things,  they 
want  to  do  what  they  cannot  do,  and  they 
don't  try  to  do  what  they  can  do.  There  is 
an  old  adage,  just  as  true  as  anything  possibly 
could  be,  that  where  there  is  a  will  there  is  a 
way,  and  this  scale,  as  I  have  pointed  out 
is  the  most  concrete,  the  most  elastic,  the  most 
flexible  contract  in  the  United  States,  and  it  has 
stood  the  acid  test  of  time.  Mr.  Seitz  has 
subscribed  to  that  himself  and  he  knows  that. 
The  World  employs  twenty-nine.  Up  until 
very  recently,  I  think  Mr.  Seitz  will  agree 
with  me,  the  World  office,  the  largest  composing 
room  in  this  city,  operated  with  a  comparative- 
ly   little    overtime — is    not    that   true,    Mr.    Seitz? 

Mr.  O'DoNNELL — But  you  must  explain  to  the 
Arbitrator  that  a  paper  having  morning  and 
evening  edition  needs  less  overtime  than  one 
having    only    one    edition. 

Mr.  Rouse — They  have  a  night  and  day  force 
on  the  New  York  Times,  I  can  give  you  the 
figures  again,  to  show  you  the  classification  of 
them.  I  have  them  all  here.  They  have  thirty- 
eight  men  working  on  the  day  side  of  the  New 
York  Times.  ISfow,  the  World,  running  on 
evening  paper,  has  only  76.  They  run  an 
evening  paper,  and  they  have  76  working  on  the 
daytime,  as  against  the  Times  having  38,  and 
they  have  no  evening  edition;  showing  you 
conclusively,  as  I  have  pointed  out  repeatedly, 
that  the  condition  of  the  Times  was  brought 
about  solely  and  wholly  by  the  fact  produced  in 
evidence  that  the  Times  is  doing  such  an 
enormous  amount  of  business  that  they  cannot 
keep  up  with  the  people  running  there  with  the 
work  for  them  to  do,  and  that  they  are  making 
money  so  fast  they  don't  know  how  to  count  it, 
and   that  their   composing  room   each   day   is  be- 


coming inadequate;  every  twenty-four  hours 
that  gdes  by  in  the  New  York  Times  composing 
room  the  business  is  outgrowing  their  capacity 
for  the   producing  the   business. 

Mr.  Polachek — I  do  not  think  that  the 
Arbitrator  will  say  that  where  we  are  allowed 
to  get  in  eight  hours'  work,  including  lunch 
period  or  not  including  it,  where  the  Union 
giTes  us  a  shift  period  of  6  p.  m.  to  3  a.  m., 
which  is  the  limit  within  which  we  can  have 
regular  time  at  night,  that  that  gives  the  Pub- 
lishers any  latitude  or  any  flexibility  in  the 
arrangement  of  a  force.  I  know  when  I  was  in 
Chicago  we  were  able  to  put  men  on  at  six 
o'clock  at  night  for  a  regular  shift  of  eight 
hours;  we  were  able  to  put  them  on  at  seven 
o'clock  or  at  eight  o'clock  or  at  nine  o'clock. 
Of  course  it  is  required,  and  it  is  the  desire  of 
the  newspaper  to  make  that  phalanx  regular,  to 
make  those  working  hours  regular,  and  keep  this 
force  so  constituted  that  it  is  at  all  times  able 
to  produce  the  best  result  in  getting  out  the 
required  work;  but  where  you  have  an  inflexible 
schedule  of  six  to  three,  nine  hours  within  which 
to  do  all  your  work,  on  an  eight-hour  basis, 
then  I  say  you  don't  give  the  office  an  oppor- 
tunity to  adjust  its  work  to  those  hours  without 
incurring  the  penalty.  I  am  not  talking  for 
the  Times  alone.  I  am  talking  for  the  Pub- 
lishers'   Association. 

Mr.  Rouse — I  will  say  for  the  Union  that  we 
don't  want  an  increase  if  we  have  to  change  any 
of  the  working  conditions  that  we  have  now. 

Mr.  PoLACHEK^ — I  can  quote  the  record,  Mr. 
Morrison,  where  he  said  exactly  the  same  thing 
to  the  last  Arbitrator,  that  if  you  give  them  any- 
thing that  will  change  the  working  conditions, 
they  don't  want  a  raise  in  salary. 

Mr.  Rouse — No;  why  should  we  add  three 
hours   to   our   work? 

Mr.  Polachek — This  contract,  which  might 
have  been  a  very  good  contract  fifteen  years 
ago,  before  the  higher  development  of  news- 
papers to  their  present  state,  is  not  susceptible 
and  not  adaptable  for  the  business  as  it  is  run 
to-day.  Now,  that  is  a  fact,  and  these  gentle- 
men come  to  us  and  say,  "  We  would  rather 
not  talk  about  money  if  you  want  to  change 
the  working  conditions."  Are  they  never  going 
to  change  to  meet  the  needs  of  the  times?  Are 
we  always  going  to  hear  that  plea,  "  We  won't 
take  a  step  backward?"  This  is  not  a  step 
backward. 

Mr.   Rouse — Adding  three  hours? 

Mr.  Polachek — Pass  the  three  hours.  I  am 
not  interested.  I  don't  care  whether  you  get  it 
or  not.  That  is  the  way  I  feel  about  that.  But 
I  do  say 

Mr.  Morrison — I  want  to  ask  this  question: 
I  am  not  clear  in  my  mind  in  regard  to  the  ques- 
tion of  overtime  that  is  required  by  the  different 
papers,  particularly  on  Saturday,  in  getting  out 
the  Sunday  edition.  I  want  to  find  out  whether 
two  hours  overtime  covered  it  all,  or  i^hether 
three  hours  covered  it  all,  or  whether  it  could 
be    brought   within    two    hours. 

Mr.  Rouse — I  should  say  that  under  ordinary 
circumstances  two  hours  would  cover  it.  Two 
hours  would  be  the  minimum  amount  for  any  day 
in  the  week.  Above  that  would  be  abnormal.  I 
should  say  two  hours  would  be  a  normal  amount 
in  every  day  of  the  week,  and  that  three  hours 
would  be  abnormal. 

Mr.  Polachek — Let  us  sec  Exhibit  C.  For  a 
period  of  two  weeks  in  the  Times  office  31 S  men 
had  one  hour  overtime.  Eighteen  men  in  the 
same  period  had  an  hour  and  a  half,  93  men  in 
the  same  period  had  two  hours.  Eighty  men  in 
that  same  period  had  two  hours  and  a  half; 
143    men   had   three    hours. 

Mr.   Rouse — Is  that  for  a  week? 

Mr.  Polachek — That  is  for  a  two-week  period. 
73  men  had  three  and  a  half  hours.  150  men  had 
four  hours. 

Mr.  Rousk — That  will  be  covering  the  period 
of  two  weeks? 


3t 


Mr  PoucHEic— \cs,  twelve  men  had  four  and 
a  half  h>^ur».  tour  men  had  five  hours.  One 
man  had  nye  and  a  half  hours.  Three  men  had 
»ix  .inJ  a  halt  hours.  One  man  had  seven  and 
«  ijuarter  hours.     One  man  had  ci^'ht  hours. 

Mr.  RoisB — I  think  that  would  only  verify  my 
statement  that  the  normal  condition  would  be 
for  two  hours. 

Mr.  PouACMKK— There  are  over  two  hours 
nerc.  4/3  men  here  had  overtime  of  over  two 
hours.  516  had  two  hours  or  less.  The  majority 
bad   two   hours  or  less. 

Mr  Morrison— Could  conditions  be  so  ar- 
ranged that  the  work  for  overtime  could  be  con- 
fined within  two  hours  over  the  regular  hours 
worked  ? 

Mr.  Rouse — Under  normal  conditions  it  could. 


Mr.  PoLACHEK— Under  normal  conditions  it 
could  in  our  office,  I  presume.  I  will  have  to  kg 
over   that   carefully.  "^ 

Mr.  O'DoNNELL— It  could  Hot  in  ours.  We  are 
workmg  under  norma!  conditions  now 

Mr  Morrison— I  want  to  ask  if  it  is  not  pos- 
sible tor  the  various  papers  to  so  arrange  their 
composing  rooms  that  they  could  confine  the 
overtime,  except  m  rare  cases,  to  not  more  than 
two   hours. 

Mr  PoLACHEK— It  could  not  be  done.  On 
Saturdays  it  would  be  impossible  in  any  of  the 
big  newspapers. 

Mr.  Morrison— Do  I  understand  that  the  Pub- 
lishers have   rested  their  case? 

Mr.  PoLACHEK— Yes.  On  behalf  of  the  Pub- 
lishers, I  want  to  thank  you  for  your  courtesy  in 
this   matter.  ' 


(PROCEEDING  CLOSED.) 


40 


FRANK  MORRISON 

AMERICAN  FEDERATION  OF  LABOR  BLDG. 
WASHINGTON.   O.  C. 


Washington,  D.  C,  May  6,  1919. 


Mr.  Leon  H.  Rouse,  President, 

Typographical  Union  No.  6,  /.  T.  U., 

Rooms  616-618  World  Building,  New  York  City. 

My  Dear  Mr.  Rouse — Enclosed  herewith  you  will  find  decision  ren- 
dered by  me  on  the  questions  submitted  in  arbitration  by  the  Publishers  and 
Printers.  Duplicate  has  been  mailed  to-day  to  Mr.  Don  C.  Seitz,  Chairman 
of  the  Publishers'  Committee. 

I  am. 

Yours  very  truly, 

Frank  Morrison, 

Arbitrator. 
Enclosure. 


41 


Washington,  D.  C,  May  2,  1919. 


To  Messrs. 


Don  C.  Seitz,  Leon  H.  Rouse, 

Herbert  Gunnison,  S.  Oppenheimer, 

Louis  Wiley,  Chas.  Marquart, 

Victor  H.  Polachek,  James  W.  Keller, 

Ervin  Wardman,  John  S.  O'Connell, 

Hugh  A.  O'Donnell,  Theo.  F.  Douglas, 

Edward  P.  Call,  Louis  Fischer, 

Representing     the     Publishers'  Representing  New  York  Typo- 
Association    of    the  City    of              graphical  Union  No.  6. 
New  York. 


Gentlemen — Following  an  agreement  that  the  undersigned  act  as 
Arbitrator  in  the  wages  and  working  conditions  dispute  between  the  Pub- 
lishers' Association  of  the  City  of  New  York  (hereinafter  referred  to  as 
the  Publishers)  and  Typogra)phical  Union  No.  6  of  the  International 
Typographical  Union  (hereinafter  referred  to  as  the  Printers)  it  was 
agreed,  at  a  meeting  of  representatives  of  these  parties,  held  in  the  World 
Building,  New  York  City,  on  April  17,  1919,  that  the  award  of  the  Arbi- 
trator will  be  retroactive  as  of  April  1,  1919,  and  expire  on  March  31,  1920. 

For  record  and  reference  purposes  I  herewith  attach  a  Statement  of 
Facts,  agreed  to  by  both  parties  to  this  controversy. 

In  the  Agreed  Statement  of  Facts  the  Printers  propose  that  in  the 
renewal  of  their  agreement  with  the  Publishers,  which  expired  March  31, 
1919,  that  wages  be  increased  $9.00  per  week  for  all  members  employed  by 
the  Publishers,  who  are  paid  on  a  weekly  basis,  and  an  equivalent  increase 
to  all  members  who  are  paid  on  a  daily  or  hourly  basis;  double  time  for 
overtime  instead  of  price  and  one-half  and  an  increase  in  the  bonus  paid 
all  members  working  Saturday  and  Saturday  night. 

In  supporting  their  demands  for  the  wage  increase,  the  Printers  submit 
that  they  have  never  received  a  wage  commensurate  with  the  intelligence  and 
skill  required  of  them;  that  since  1914  the  cost  of  living  has  increased  more 
than  79  per  cent,  and  during  that  period  their  wages  have  been  advanced 
about  15  per  cent;  that  this  increase  of  15  per  cent  is  much  less  than  the 
increase  granted  other  newspaper  workers ;  that  it  is  small  in  comparison 
with  the  increases  received  by  the  skilled  and  unskilled  workers  employed  in 
other  callings  throughout  the  country ;  that  the  newspapers  of  New  York 
were  never  so  prosperous;  that  advertising  has  increased,  notwithstanding 

43 


the  increase  in  rates,  and  that  some  of  these  newspapers  have  been  compelled 
to  refuse  many  columns  of  advertising  each  day ;  that  until  recently  the  news- 
paper printer  was  the  highest  paid  in  the  printing  trades  and  that  the  long 
period  of  apprenticesliip  and  the  mental  and  physical  strain  under  which  the 
work  of  the  newspaper  printer  must  be  performed  are  all  factors  that  justify 
this  wage  increase. 

In  refusing  to  accept  the  wage  demand  of  the  Printers,  the  Publishers 
submit  that  they  have  raised  wages  $4.50  a  week  since  January  1,  1918;  that 
the  present  wage  "  is  a  fair  wage  that  compares  most  favorably  with  wages 
paid  printers'  crafts  in  newspapers  all  over  the  country  " ;  that  there  is  "  a 
probability  of  a  steadily  decreased  cost  of  living  in  view  of  the  ending  of 
the  war  " ;  that  the  "  Publishers  are  now  facing  increased  costs  of  paper  and 
other  material,"  and  that  "  the  Publishers  are  not  opposing  the  demand  of 
the  Typographical  Union  on  any  ground  except  that  it  is  exorbitant  and 
unwarranted  either  by  business  conditions  confronting  the  Publishers  or  by 
necessities  confronting  the  Typographical  Union  members." 

In  the  Publishers'  brief  they  suggest  that  in  the  event  that  the  Arbi- 
trator "  feels  that  the  members  of  the  Typographical  Union  are  entitled 
to  any  relief  at  all  in  the  matter  of  wages  "  that  the  Arbitrator  change 
certain  working  conditions  which  "  might  in  a  measure  mitigate  the  charge 
against  the  Publishers." 

Summarized,  these  changes  are :  Remove  the  Itfnch  period  of  one- 
half  hour,  thereby  making  the  work-day  eight  hours  instead  of  seven  and 
one-half  hours;  define  day  work  as  any  eight  hours  between  the  hours  of 
6  a.  m.  and  6  p.  m.,  and  define  night  work  as  any  eight  hours  between  6  p.  m. 
and  6  a.  m. ;  permit  extras  of  the  foreman's  selection  to  be  employed  not 
to  exceed  three  days  in  any  one  week  and  an  unlimited  number  of  weeks, 
as  against  the  Printers'  demand  that  these  extras  be  limited  to  one  week's 
employment  if  others  are  available. 

COMMENT   AND   AWARD 

WAGES 

It  would  be  fruitless  at  this  time  for  your  Arbitrator  to  enter  into  a 
discussion  on  the  causes  for  increased  living  costs  now  confronting  the 
workers.     The  question  offers  no  escape  by  theorizing. 

What  interests  us  is  the  fact  that  the  high  living  costs  exists,  and  if  the 
processes  of  arbitration,  which  both  parties  to  this  controversy  agree  to, 
are  to  be  used  with  purpose  and  effect  rather  than  as  a  vehicle  to  allay  a 
remedial  unrest,  we  must  attempt  to  re-establish  the  living  standards  of 
the  plaintiffs  in  this  case. 

The  Printers  submitted  an  article  published  in  the  March  29,  1919, 
New  York  Times,  which  states  that  the  United  States  Department  of  Labor 
reports  an  average  increase  of  79  per  cent,  in  food  prices  in  five  years. 

Illustrative  of  the  high  cost  of  living,  your  Arbitrator  refers  to  the 
reports  issued  by  the  United  States  Bureau  of  Labor  Statistics  which  show 
that  the  cost  of  living  in  New  York  City  in  December,  1918,  advanced  78.79 
per  cent,  over  December,  1914. 

44 


The  following  is  the  percentage  of  yearly  increases  worked  out  by  the 
Bureau : 


Per  Cent,  of  Increase  in  Retail  Prices  in  December  1915,  1916,  1917,  and  1918, 
Above  the  Prices  in  December  1914. 


New  York,  N.  Y. 

Items  of  Expenditure 

Per  cent,  of  increase  above  December,  1914,  in 

Dec. 
1915 

Dec. 
1916 

Dec. 
1917 

Dec. 
1918 

Food 

1.34 

4.78 
4.87 

16.26 

20.32 
.24.73 

55.28 

51.40 
57.63 

85  99 

Clothing: 

Male 

126.39 

Female 

137.15 

Total 

4.82 

22.31 

54.21 

131.25 

Housing 

.10* 
.06* 
8.43 
1.97 

*.05 
10.98 
27.60 
14.91 

2.63 
19.92 
56.47 
44.68 

6.47 

Fuel  and  light   

45.47 

Furniture  and  furnishings     

126.51 

Miscellaneous 

70.01 

Total 

1.97 

14.91 

44.68 

78.79 

*  Decrease. 

Other  reports  by  the  Government  support  the  claim  of  a  78.79  per  cent 
increase  in  the  cost  of  living,  which  the  Printers  are  attempting  to  meet  by  a 
total  wage  increase  of  15  per  cent  since  1914. 

The  National  Industrial  Conference  Board,  representing  18  National 
Employers'  Associations,  in  their  pamphlet  "  Wartime  Changes  in  the  Cost 
of  Living,"  state  that  the  cost  of  living  has  increased  65.9  per  cent  from 
July,  1914,  to  November,  1918. 

The  printers  submitted  a  copy  of  the  April  14,  1919,  New  York 
Annalist,  which  contains  a  chart  showing  that  the  cost  of  living  for  the  week 
of  April  14,  1919,  had  reached  the  highest  point.  It  was  submitted  in  sup- 
port of  their  position  that  the  cost  of  living  was  not  on  the  decline. 

The  Publishers  submitted  a  list  of  31  cities  which  pay  a  lower  rate  to 
Printers  (with  two  exceptions)  than  do  the  Publishers. 

The  Printers  submitted  statistics  prepared  for  wage  adjustments  by 
Messrs.  W.  Jett  Lauck  and  Hugh  S.  Hanna,  which  show  that  in  December, 
1917,  compositors  and  linotype  operators  on  evening  newspapers  throughout 
the  country  made  the  lowest  advance  (6  per  cent)  since  1914  and  1915,  in  a 
list  of  44  leading  occupations.  The  highest  increase  in  this  list  was  105 
per  cent. 

The  following  is  the  table  giving  the  percentage  of  increase  in  the  44 
occupations  : 

45 


SUMMARY  OF  STUDY. 


y^        .B         ■-  ^ 


.S     " 


~       .-3         *>        -C 


ji    w 


P9     n 


w         fH 


(St        o        w 


js       iS       S 


'J      a     J5 


fe    ti    a 


c  i  *" 

rt  -'  i; 

C  2  fa 

o       •«         S  3  " 

H     S      S  CO  o) 


"S  -S         r"^ 


5    <; 


S      hS       5      PQ 


•a      >>; 
5     s^ 


J3        .-S         > 


e  z 


.s    5    " 

S      E      S 


2     S 


42 


SUMMARY  OF  STUDY. 


^      * 


•Sr    a 
•2      " 

5  ^ 


-s-    o 


iJ  w 


—    J:     ^ 


.3         o       =3 


•S     a      £3 

i  is  •- 


n    :s    H 


M       U 


-.        w        3 


5    a 


'^     a    c^ 


2      «!     c/3     w     J2 


J2      >< 


^ 

a 

5 

a 

.2 

2 

S 

u 

ii 

p    « 


ft 

^ 

> 

rt 

o. 

Q 

^  ^ 


£     -      5      f 


p2     ^ 


w     42 


o      .-      ^ 


>^   a 


-"    ^   5 


p<   p< 


til       J3       ^ 


ja      C     ^ 


S      -S      K 


a    ^ 


o  s 


^     S    M    m    W    5 


47 


Your  Arbitrator  can  find  no  conclusive  evidence  to  support  the  Pub- 
lishers' statement  that  there  is  "  a  probability  of  a  steadily  decreased  cost 
of  living  in  view  of  the  ending  of  the  war."  My  opinion  is  partly  based  on 
the  following  observations  of  basic  and  other  industries : 

The  price  of  steel  shows  no  signs  of  substantial  recession ;  Southern 
cotton  planters  are  urging  the  restriction  of  acreage  to  hold  prices ;  the 
American  Meat  Packers'  Association  has  announced  (public  press  April  12, 
1919),  "that  high  prices  will  continue  for  a  long  time  .  .  .  low  meat 
prices  must  wait  until  European  production  is  in  good  swing  again  " ;  one 
of  the  country's  foremost  bakery  employers  (Mr,  George  F.  Ward)  has 
announced  (public  press,  April  23,  1919),  that  "no  matter  how  low  the 
price  of  flour  falls,  and  there  is  no  present  prospect  of  any  reduction  at 
all,  the  price  of  bread  can  not  go  to  the  old  figure  " ;  a  committee  appointed 
by  the  Chamber  of  Commerce  of  the  United  States  predicts  higher  levels  in 
shoes,  states  that  higher  levels  have  been  reached  in  certain  grades  of  coal, 
and  in  no  case  does  the  committee  indicate  that  substantial  reductions  will 
be  made  in  prices  as  a  whole. 

Under  date  of  April  30,  1919,  the  Information  and  Education  Service 
of  the  United  States  Department  of  Labor  issued  this  statement: 

Statistics  on  commodity  prices,  as  published  in  Dun's  Review,  appear 
to  corroborate  the  conclusion,  recently  announced  by  the  Division  of  Public 
Works  and  Construction  Development  of  the  U.  S.  Department  of  Labor, 
that  the  popular  expectations  for  price  recessions  will  not  soon  be  realized. 

The  statistics  show  that  the  number  of  price  increases  on  commodities 
in  April  have  been  in  excess  of  the  decreases,  the  recorded  fluctuations  being 
as  follows: 

Week  of  Price  Decreases.  Price  Increases. 

April  5    29  34 

April   12    40  42 

April   19    29  32 

April  26    19  28 

The  advances  are  mainly  in  the  foodstuff  group  of  commodities  and 
the  declines  are  in  the  drugs  and  chemicals  group.     *     *     * 

According  to  these  statistics  instead  of  there  having  been  a  general 
recession  of  the  price  level  in  March  and  April,  there  has  been  an  advance 
with  prices  of  building  material  remaining  fairly  constant. 

To  ask  the  Printers  to  continue  to  accept  a  standard  of  living  lower 
than  the  Publishers  themselves  agreed  to  when  they  accepted  pre-war 
rates  is  no  more  equitable  than  to  ask  the  Publishers  to  reduce  their  living 
standards  to  meet  the  increased  production  cost.  While  this  proposition 
is  unusual  it  can  be  justified  on  moral  ground  and  elemental  justice,  if  the 
theory  of  mutuality  between  Capital  and  Labor  is  not  merely  a  shibboleth. 

This  point  is  made  to  emphasize  your  Arbitrator's  belief  that  there  is 
an  inescapable  obligation  on  the  New  York  newspaper  industry  to  main- 
tain the  living  standards  of  Printers  employed  therein. 

If  the  Printer  had  received  increases  based  upon  the  $30.00  a  week 
standard  for  day  work  in  1914,  comparative  to  the  increased  living  cost  of 
78.79  per  cent.,  he  would  have  to  now  receive  $53.60  a  week  to  maintain 
the  same  living  standard.     If  the  Printer  be  conceded  an  increase  of  $9.00 

4S 


per  week,  his  wage  is  brought  up  to  $43.50.  Accept  these  figures  and  com- 
parison will  show  that  there  is  still  a  difference  of  approximately  $10.00 
per  week  which  burden  must  be  borne  by  the  Printer  until  such  time  as 
living  costs  have  decreased  comparatively. 

Your  Arbitrator,  therefore,  sustains  the  Printers  on  this  question 
and  orders  an  advance  in  wages  for  the  full  amount  of  $9.00  a  week,  to 
all  members  of  the  union,  parties  to  this  proceeding,  who  are  employed 
on  a  weekly  basis,  and  an  equivalent  to  all  members  of  the  union  employed 
on  a  daily  or  hourly  basis. 

Your  Arbitrator  in  making  this  award,  desires  to  call  attention  to  the 
fact  that  these  new  rates  will  still  place  New  York  City  behind  Portland, 
Oregon,  with  its  new  $45. -$49.50  rates  for  a  45-hour  week,  with  the 
increased  cost  of  living  72.38  per  cent. — 6.41  per  cent,  less  than  New  York 
City;  and  Seattle,  Washington,  with  its  new  $42. -$45.  rate  for  a  42-hour 
week,  with  the  increased  cost  of  living  70.46  per  cent. — 8.32  per  cent,  less 
than  New  York  City. 

BONUS 

It  is  the  decision  of  the  Arbitrator  that  all  members  working  Saturday 
and  Saturday  night  shall  receive  $1.81  extra. 

OVERTIME 

On  the  demand  of  the  Printers  in  Section  XI.,  for  an  increase  from 
price  and  one-half  to  double  time,  and  which  is  opposed  by  the  Publishers, 
the  evidence  submitted  indicated  a  desire  of  both  parties  to  eliminate  over- 
time wherever  possible.  Under  ordinary  circumstances  your  Arbitrator 
believes  that  overtime  should  be  penalized  to  the  point  of  prohibition,  except 
in  cases  of  emergency,  but  because  of  the  expressed  opposition  of  both 
parties  to  this  practice  and  the  contention  of  the  Publishers  that  much  of  the 
overtime  was  due  to  unavoidable  conditions,  your  Arbitrator  decides  against 
the  demand  of  the  Printers  for  an  increase  from  price  and  one-half  to  double 
time. 

EXTRAS 

Section  14,  of  the  Agreed  Statement  of  Facts  (which  relates  to  extras), 
discloses  marked  disagreement  between  the  parties  to  this  controversy. 
From  the  evidence  submitted  by  the  Printers  it  has  developed  considerable 
feeling  because  foremen  are  charged  with  failing  to  distribute  extra  work  in 
an  equitable  manner. 

The  Printers  ask  for  a  continuation  of  the  present  rule  that  extras  may 
be  put  on  at  one  hiring,  not  to  exceed  three  days  or  nights  in  any  one  week, 
but  the  same  extras  may  not  be  so  employed  in  twO  consecutive  weeks  if 
others  are  available. 

A  former  Arbitrator  attempted  to  adjust  this  question  but  neither  party 
was  satisfied.  The  matter  was  again  referred  to  the  Arbitrator,  whose 
decision  is  now  accepted  by  the  Printers  and  opposed  by  the  Publishers,  who 
claim  that  by  its  operation  the  office  is  debarred  from  the  services  of  "  very 
competent  extras."  They  also  submit  that  foremen  are  members  of  the 
union  and  are  subject  to  its  discipline. 

49 


Your  Arbitrator  feels  that  this  question  cannot  be  solved  by  disciplinary 
laws.  It  is  inherent  in  man  to  exercise  power  and  judgment  and  to  defend 
same  when  his  natural  inclinations  conflict  with  laws  that  cannot  establish 
degrees  of  a  universal  tendency.  This  is  true  of  all  men,  regardless  of 
their  station. 

The  union  does  not  question  the  right  of  the  foreman  to  protect  the 
oflfice  from  imposition  by  debarring  an  incompetent  extra. 

Your  Arbitrator  takes  the  position  that  these  extras,  as  a  class,  are 
necessary  in  the  production  of  a  newspaper,  and  that  it  would  be  just  as 
logical  to  permit  the  foreman  to  dismiss  situation  holders  who  are  not 
"  very  competent  "  and  replace  them  by  extras  who  are  thus  classified  by 
him,  as  it  is  to  apply  this  standard  to  extras.  Because  the  extras  are 
essential,  they  have  rights,  and  these  rights  should  be  protected  in  line  with 
the  spirit  of  the  time  and  the  relations  between  the  parties  to  this  con- 
troversy. 

Printers'  Section  14,  of  the  Agreed  Statement  of  Facts,  is  therefore 
sustained. 

TO  EXTEND  WORK  DAY  FROM  SEVEN  AND  ONE-HALF  TO 

EIGHT  HOURS 

The  Publishers  ask  that  the  working  day  be  extended  from  seven  and 
one-half  hours  to  eight  hours.  The  Printers  oppose  the  abandonment  of 
the  present  rule,  w'hich  has  prevailed  for  many  years. 

Your  Arbitrator  is  of  the  opinion  that  to  lengthen  the  work  day  in 
any  calling,  and  especially  in  this  intensified  industry,  would  be  in  opposi- 
tion to  the  world-wide  agitation  for  a  betterment  of  the  workers'  condi- 
tions, and  for  physical  reasons  alone  it  can  not  be  justified. 

Even  were  your  Arbitrator  to  ignore  these  facts,  it  is  neither  wise 
nor  practical  to  take  from  workers  long-established  conditions. 

It  is  therefore  ordered  that  no  change  be  made  in  the  hours  constituting 
a  work  day,  or  work  night. 

TIME  IN  WHICH  WORK  SHOULD  BE  PERFORMED 

The  Publishers  ask  that  the  time  in  which  work  shall  be  done  shall  be 
as  follows :  Day  work,  from  6  a.  m.  to  6  p.  m.,  instead  of  8  a.  m.  to  6  p.  m. ; 
night  work,  from  6  p.  m.  to  6  a.  m.,  instead  of  6  p.  m.  to  3  a.  m. ;  "  third 
shift,"  from  3  a.  m.  to  10  a.  m.  The  Printers  oppose,  saying  that  the 
present  system  has  been  in  vogue  28  years,  and  that  the  Publishers  now 
have  the  right  to  Tall  Printers  to  the  office  for  any  unforeseen  reason  or 
emergency  before  the  hours  specified  in  the  limitations. 

Your  Arbitrator  believes  that  if  the  Publishers  were  given  a  twelve- 
hour  leeway  in  which  the  Printer  must  work  his  seven  and  one-half  hours, 
it  would  be  a  most  regrettable  decision  because  of  the  resultant  upheaval 
of  the  workers'  social  life. 

With  a  full  appreciation  of  the  Publishers'  announced  endeavor  to 
offset  any  wage  increase  that  might  possijaly  be  made  by  securing  changes 

50 


in  working  conditions,  your  Arbitrator  is  compelled  to  dissent  from  the 
proposal  to  extend  to  twelve  hours  the  time  in  which  work  shall  be  done. 

Your  Arbitrator  decides  that  Sections  4,  6,  7,  8,  9,  10,  11,  14,  40  and  43, 
being  the  only  sections  in  the  scale  of  prices  to  which  differences  have  been 
submitted  to  the  Arbitrator  shall  read  as  follows: 

4.  All  members  of  the  Union  employed  on  morning  newspapers,  except 
as  hereinafter  provided  for,  shall  receive  not  less  than  $46.50  per  week. 
Eight  continuous  hours  (including  thirty  minutes  for  lunch)  shall  constitute 
a  night's  work,  the  hours  to  be  between  6  p.  m.  and  3  a.  m. 

6.  All  members  of  the  Union  employed  on  evening  newspapers,  except 
as  hereinafter  provided  for,  shall  receive  not  less  than  $43.50  per  week. 
Eight  continuous  hours  (including  thirty  minutes  for  lunch)  shall  constitute 
a  day's  work,  the  hours  to  be  between  8  a.  m.  and  6  p.  m.  When  called  to 
work  at  or  before  5  a.  m.  $2.00  extra  shall  be  charged  in  addition  to  the 
overtime ;  and  when  called  to  work  at  or  before  7 :30  a.  m.,  $1.00  extra  shall 
be  charged  in  addition  to  the  overtime.  On  evening  newspapers  publishing 
six  days,  Sunday  work  shall  be  double  price. 

7 .  Members  of  the  Union  employed  on  evening  newspapers  publishing 
Sunday  editions,  except  as  hereinafter  provided  for,  shall  receive  not  less 
than  $7.25  per  day.  Eight  continuous  hours  (including  thirty  minutes  for 
lunch)  shall  constitute  a  day's  work,  the  hours  to  be  between  8  a.  m.  and 
6  p.  m.  The  rate  for  Saturday  night  shall  not  be  less  than  $7.75  per  night 
of  seven  continuous  hours  (including  thirty  minutes  for  lunch),  the  hours 
to  be  between  6  p.  m.  and  3  a.  m.  All  members  working  Saturday  and 
Saturday  night  shall  receive  $1.81  extra.  Overtime  Safurday  night  shall  be 
not  less  than  $1.81  per  hour.  Extras  to  receive  50  cents  per  day  or  night 
in  addition  to  the  above  scale.  (This  does  not  apply  to  extras  working  a 
double  header.)  When  holidays  occur  on  Saturdays  and  the  paper  is  not 
published,  the  rate  for  Saturday  night  shall  be  $9.00.  When  called  to  work 
on  Sundays,  between  8  a.  m.  and  6  p.  m.  shall  be  paid  double  price ;  but  in  no 
case  shall  a  member  receive  less  than  a  day's  pay.    When  called  at  or  before 

5  a.  m.  $2.00  .extra  shall  be  charged  in  addition  to  the  overtime,  and  when 
called  at  or  before  7:30  a.  m.,  $1.00  extra  shall  be  charged  in  addition  to  the 
overtime. 

8.  Members  of  the  Union  employed  on  evening  newspapers  publishing 
Sunday  evening  editions  shall  receive  not  less  than  $7.25  per  day.  Eight 
continuous  hours  (including  thirty  minutes  for  lunch)  shall  constitute  a 
day's  work,  the  hours  to  be  between  8  a.  m.  and  6  p.  m.  The  rate  for 
Sunday  shall  not  be  less  than  $9.00  per  day  of  seven  continuous  hours 
(including  thirty  minutes  for  lunch),  the  hours  to  be  between  8  a.  m.  and 

6  p.  m.  Extras  to  receive  50  cents  per  day  in  addition  to  the  above  scale. 
When  called  at  or  before  5  a.  m.,  $2.00  extra  shall  be  charged  in  addition  to 
the  overtime,  and  when  called  at  or  before  7:30  a.  m.,  $1.00  extra  shall  he 
charged  in  addition  to  the  overtime.  Overtime  on  Sunday  shall  be  paid  for 
at  the  rate  of  $1.81  per  hour. 

9.  The  scale  for  a  "  third  shift  "  shall  he  $49.50  per  week.  Seven  and 
a  half  continuous  hours  (including  thirty  minutes  for  lunch)  shall  constitute 
a  day's  work,  the  hours  to  be  between  2  a.  m.  and  10  a.  m. 

10.  Newspaper  offices  using  a  third  force  are  privileged  to  put  on  one 
make-up  between  the  hours  of  6  a.  m.  and  2  p.  m.  for  the  same  hours  and 
wages  as  other  members  of  the  third  shift. 

11.  Overtime,  which  shall  apply  to  work  done  before  as  well  as  after 
the  hours  specified,  shall  be  charged  at  the  rate  of  price  and  one-half,  based 
on  the  regular  scale  for  the  specified  hours  for  time  worked,  unless  other- 
Si 


wise  provided  for.  Overtime  shall  be  computed  in  five-minute  periods, 
unless  otherwise  arranged  between  the  office  and  the  chapel.  Rotation  in 
overtime  to  be  at  the  discretion  of  the  office. 

14.  Extras  may  be  put  on  in  machine  offices  either  day  or  night  and 
may  be  put  on  at  one  hiring  for  not  to  exceed  three  days  or  nights  in  any 
one  week,  but  the  same  extra  may  not  be  so  employed  in  two  consecutive 
weeks  if  others  are  available.  When  in  accordance  with  the  above  an 
extra  is  hired  for  more  than  one  day  or  night,  he  must,  if  he  fails  to  work 
for  the  period  for  which  he  is  engaged,  supply  a  substitute.  In  hiring 
extras  the  publishers  shall  select  such  extras  from  the  priority  •  list  (not 
necessarily  in  order  of  priority),  if  extras  from  such  list  are  available. 
Extras  shall  receive  for  each  day  or  night  50  cents  in  addition  to  the  regular 
scale. 

40.     The  scale  for  machine-tenders  shall  be : 

From     1  to     4  machines $38.50 

From     5  to     8  Machines $39. 50 

From     9  to  12  machines $42.50 

From  13  or  more  machines $44.50 

Machine  tenders  w^orking  at  night  shall  receive  $5.00  per  week  in  addi- 
tion to  the  above  day  scale. 

43.  All  time  worked  over  and  above  these  hours  shall  be  considered 
as  overtime,  and  shall  be  charged  at  the  rate  of  price  and  one-half  every 
hour  so  employed,  based  on  the  regular  machine-tenders'  scale  for  the  speci- 
fied hours,  computed  in  five-minute  periods,  unless  otherwise  arranged 
between  the  office  and  the  chapel. 

FRANK  MORRISON, 

Arbitrator. 


52 


NEW  YORK 
TYPOGRAPHICAL    UNION    No.  6 

ROOMS  616  to  618  WORLD  BUILDING 


New  York  City,  May  15,  1919. 

Frank  Morrison,  Esq., 

Hotel  Continental,  41st  Street  and  Broadway,  New  York  City. 

Dear  Mr.  Morrison — Upon  receiving  the  decision  submitted  by  you 
as  arbitrator  between  the  Publishers  Association  and  Typographical  Union 
No.  6,  several  offices  have  paid  the  $9  increase  to  all  members  of  the  Union 
employed  there. 

It  has  come  to  our  knowledge  that  in  other  offices  where  members  of 
the  Union  have  been  receiving  over  the  scale,  those  members  will  only  re- 
ceive the  difference  between  what  they  are  receiving  and  the  additional 
amount  of  the  increase. 

There  seems  to  be  some  difference  of  opinion  over  the  meaning  of  your 
language,  to  wit : 

"  Your  Arbitrator,  therefore,  sustains  the  Printers  on  this  ques- 
tion and  orders  an  advance  in  wages  for  the  full  amount  of  $9.00 
a  week,  to  all  members  of  the  Uiion,  parties  to  this  proceeding,  who 
are  employed  on  a  weekly  basis,  and  an  equivalent  to  all  members  of 
the  Union  employed  on  a  daily  or  hourly  basis." 

This  is  construed  by  the  Union  to  mean  that  those  members  of  the 
Union  who  are  already  receiving  over  the  former  scale  shall  receive  the 
$9.00  increase. 

We  would  respectfully  request  a  final  word  on  this  point,  ai)ologizing 
for  this  additional  tax  on  your  valuable  time  and  assuring  you  of  our  grate- 
ful appreciation  of  your  services. 

A  copy  of  this  letter  has  been  given  to  Mr.  Don  C.  Scitz,  Chairman  of 

the  Publishers  Committee. 

Sincerely  yours, 

Leon  H.  Rouse, 

President. 


53 


FRANK    MORRISON 

AMERICAN    FEDERATION    OF    LABOR    BLDG. 
WASHINGTON,  D.  C. 


Washington,  D.  C,  May  22,  1919. 


Mr.  Leon  H.  Rouse,  President, 
Typographical  Union  No.  6, 

Rooms  616-618  World  Building,  New  York  City. 

My  Dear  Mr.  Rouse — Enclosed  herewith  you  will  find  decision  rend- 
ered by  me  on  paragraph  submitted  for  interpretation  by  the  Printers  and 
Publishers.  Duplicate  has  been  mailed  today  to  Mr.  Don  C.  Seitz,  Chair- 
man of  the  Publishers'  Committee. 

Yours  very  truly, 

Frank  Morrison, 

Arbitrator. 
Enclosure. 


54 


FRANK   MORRISON 

AMERICAN    FEDERATION    OF   LABOR    BLDG. 
WASHINGTON,  D.  C. 


■     Washington,  D.  C,  May  22,  1919. 

To  Messrs. 

Don  C.  Seitz,  Leon  H.  Rouse, 

Herbert  Gunnison,  S.  Oppenheimer, 

Louis  Wiley,  Chas.  Marquart, 

Victor  H.  Polachek,  James  W.  Keller, 

Ervin  Wardman,  John  S.  O'Connell, 

Hugh  A.  O'Donnell,  Theo.  F.  Douglas, 

Edward  P.  Call,  Louis  Fischer, 

Representing       the  Publishers'         Representing   New    York    Typo- 
Association     of    the     City     of  graphical  Union  No.  6. 
New  York. 

Gentlemen — In  compliance  with  agreement,  the  undersigned  met  with 
representatives  of  the  Publishers'  Association  of  New  York  City,  and 
representatives  of  Typographical  Union  No.  6,  in  the  World  lUiilding,  New 
York  City,  on  May  20,  1919,  for  the  purpose  of  interpreting  a  paragraph 
of  the  decision  of  your  Arbitrator  made  on  May  2,  1919,  over  which  there 
was  a  difference  of  opinion  as  to  its  meaning.  The  jDaragraph  reads  as 
follows : 

"  Your  Arbitrator,  therefore,  sustains  the  Printers  on  this  ques- 
tion and  orders  an  advance  in  wages  for  the  full  amount  of  $9.00 
a  week,  to  all  members  of  the  union,  parties  to  this  proceeding,  who 
are  employed  on  a  weekly  basis,  and  an  equivalent  to  all  members 
of  the  union  employed  on  a  daily  or  hourly  basis." 

The  Printers  construe  the  above  paragraph  to  mean  that  those  mem- 
bers of  the  union  who  receive  more  than  the  wage  scale  which  expired  on 
MarcTi  31,  1919,  shall  receive  the  $9.00  increase  on  the  wage  they  receive. 

The  Publishers  contend  that  the  increase  of  $9.00  per  week  is  upon  the 
wage  scale  which  expired  on  March  31,  1919,  and  that  any  amount  paid  by 
the  Publishers  over  and  above  said  scale  was  a  personal  agreement  and 
understanding  between  themselves  and  their  employees,  and  was  not  a 
matter  for  the  Arbitrator  to  consider. 

COMMENT  AND  INTERPRETATION. 

In  the  Agreed  Statement  of  Facts,  submitted  jointly  by  the  Printers 
and  Publishers,  there  appears  the  following  definite  statement : 

"  The  following  scale  of  prices  to  take  effect  on  April  1,  1919, 
and  to  expire  March  31,  1920,  for  members  of  Typographical  Union 
No.  6,  employed  in  the  composing  rooms  on  newspapers,  was  sub- 
mitted to  the  Publishers'  Association  of  New  York  City.  The  only 
changes  requested  by  the  Union  from  the  present  newspaper  scale 
which  expired  on  March  31,  1919,  are  printed  in  black  faced  type; 
and  the  matter  to  be  omitted  is  within  black  faced  brackets." 

55 


Your  Arbitrator  was  giiidctl  in  his  decision  by  the  "  Agreed  Statement 
of  Facts."  and  he  beHeves  that  the  most  hbcral  interpretation  of  his  award, 
or  the  use  by  him  of  the  tenn  "  wages,"  can  not  apply  to  wages  in  excess  of 
the  Union's  rate  that  are  paid  to  individual  members  of  the  Union,  and 
which  were  made  no  part  of  the  controversy  between  the  Publishers  and 
the  Printers. 

It  is  therefore  ruled  that  where  an  individual  and  an  employee  agree 
on  a  wage  scale  in  excess  of  the  Union's  rate,  any  dispute  between  them, 
because  of  the  advance  in  the  Union's  rate,  is  a  matter  for  adjudication 
between  the  said  individual  and  the  employer  and  is  not  within  the  juris- 
diction of  your  Arbitrator. 

Frank  Morrison, 

Arbitrator. 


•^'^^^^^^/^-'t^-'^^  'Tl-A-i'^-tf-'T^ 


^^^>^yruL-^   <fZ^i.-^ 


^^i^^i-^ 


^7  64     .;^ 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  LIBRARY 

Los  Angeles 

This  book  is  DUE  on  the  last  date  stamped  below. 


I 


J  - 


j»A'<8    135»« 


Form  L9-25m-8, '46(9852)444 


■  55Q5 


Mom'  RG)-n    - 


UCLA-Young  Research   Library 

HD5503.N7   M83 


7M83 


Arbitration 
proceedinrs. 


JUL  c  e.  )^5ti 


m^i  5  1S6^ 


HD 
5503 

n7M8S 


yi^"  ■  -1':-::^ 


^, 


.«»***« 


,/iJ?" 


.t    fffe' 


